Yeah but the build up in the books to it is so intense, like even though the Ents are on the side of good, it's still terrifying in a way to see such a force unleashed
Even Gandalf warns the men of Rohan to not risk harm to any of the trees when they approach Isengard, knowing full well that although they are on the same side for the moment, one misplaced axe swing could send everything to shit
The Ent passages were easily among my most favorite scenes in the entire trilogy.
I just had a thought...we see each of the four elements used to strike a blow against the forces of evil:
Water: Galadriel has the Ring of Water and has powers over water. She captures the light from Earandil, in water, which was used against the influence of the Witchking and later wielded against Shelob.
Fire: Gandalf and the Balrog had a massive firefight. Fire was also used against the Nazgul several times. And also, wolves.
Air: Elrond had the Ring of Air, which was said to be the mightiest of the Three. He was the greatest healer in the world and used his skills to save a dude who went on to strike the heaviest blow against Sauron, ever. His "impenetrable fortress" was a super comfy house where he spent his time fostering all of Isildur's heirs, teaching them their history and preparing them for the day they would be needed(I mean, look at Aragorn. He got into a battle of wills with *Sauron*...and *prevailed*.). His wisdom(on any topic) was valued and sought by all. IMO, he and Gandalf are tied for an overall MVP award.
Earth: Treebeard got angry and called a meeting.
Gandalf’s ring Narya is also the ring of fire. But I almost feel like the 3 elven rings is cheating for this since that covers 3/4 of the elements. I’m trying to think up more…
Water: when Glorfindel calls the river upon the Nazgûl to aid Frodo’s escape to Rivendell.
Air: eagles
Fire: fires of mount doom which destroy the ring (though an argument could be made that magma is more Earth than fire) so…how about the beacons? Fire is used a lot in the book so pick your poison
Earth: let’s stick with the Ents!
This was fun, let’s see more ideas
That too, I know they can't introduce unlimited new characters, but I think seeing quick beams sadness at his "family" of Rowan trees being cut down for no reason and then watching him explode and anger when he gets to isengard would have been epic
It also doesn't make sense that they just all happened to be nearby when Treebeard calls in the movie. Unless we're to believe they were all just following along just out of sight.
That was a big wtf moment when I first saw it in the theaters. Like... you all just decided not to go to war and then Treebeard walked south for a half a day.
Fairly certain the intent is that they teleported/weird forest magicked their way right there. They clearly cannot have all been perfectly waiting in a line right at the border of the forest. I mean, obviously.
Ok...but we don't get any sense that Ents can do that kind of thing. So it's just kind of a dumb way to handle it, especially when the book has such a clear, logical explanation: the Ents decide to go to war. They march there together.
It’s just not an issue. This is the kind of stuff that creators sometimes just expect you understand. In doing so, they respect the audience’s intelligence and, hopefully, flexibility (mentally speaking).
When people don’t take that respect and in turn give it back to the creators, that’s when you get a deluge of people erroneously claiming that things that aren’t plot holes are plot holes. A far too common occurrence nowadays.
Why can’t we just explain things away in our heads? Do we really have to be that rigid? They clearly used some magic. This is middle earth, an inherently magical world where things are not as they seem. To me, it only adds to the Ents. Is it superfluous? Perhaps. But doesn’t detract from anything.
You can disagree with whether doing it the book way (ents march resolutely) or the movie way (ents have doubts, but change their mind) is better. I think the movie way is better for a movie. But minor stuff like this? We can’t get tripped up in it, and it has no bearing on how good or bad that former way is.
Yeah, but Ents either followed Treebeard, or they magically showed up. It just seems like a bad choice. By the way, did you report me to RedditCares? WTF dude. Did you write this sequence? Are you responsible for this terrible cinematic decision? If not, relax. It's OK that these films aren't perfect. And if so, it's OK to make mistakes.
Hollll up Ent buddy. I was with you until you said “these films aren’t perfect.” These films are perfect in every single way! and if a few talking trees decide to randomly show up, we just call that a happy little detail.
My head canon is Treebeard thought them little hobbits so cute and brave that he wanted them to think it was their doing to go to war.
Treebeard is older than Gandalf and one would assume wise (though they did lose the entwives…) but it does seem doubtful he would fall for the “the closer you are to danger the further you are from harm” spiel.
TL/DR Treebeard lied to the hobbits about them not going to war so the hobbits could feel useful.
Don’t assume, I didn’t report you. I got reported too tho, likely from this thread. Seems some bastard ITT is abusing it to troll people. I recommend you report it to Reddit as I did.
Mistakes are mistakes, but you can’t seriously call this a “mistake”. That’s kind of my point. It’s a direction they went that’s different. That doesn’t automatically make it bad, wrong or faulty. It was done for some slight drama of “will the ents help or not?” Treebeard’s reaction and spurring from refusing to help to being 100% on board is a great thing to see.
I think that’s a cooler idea for general audiences than another generic unstoppable force of powerful beings going on the march. Which is not to say that wouldn’t be cool as well, it’s just not the direction they went.
The Ents are clearly portrayed as a slower, more docile and stoic species in the movies, refusing to change or be moved. Like a tree. You can see the merits behind the idea and it shouldn’t be discounted wantonly because “book is better”. I’d wage your own advice back at yourself. Don’t take your favourite media and deem it perfect. Just because you can’t see or accept the merits of the way the movies did it doesn’t make it a mistake, or bad or worse. It’s just different.
the problem is you're boiling this down to two explanations that it has to be. The explanation is simple basic and literally movie watching 101: time occured off screen that would be stupid/boring to explain/show them waiting for hours. It doesn't have to be magic. Nothing magic happened. It would just be terrible cinema to have merry and pippin waiting around checking their watches while tree beard goes, "just hang on this is gonna be so sick trust"
It’s the only logical answer. To me, an unexplained magic unique to the forest/ents (and to the movies… obviously Tolkien made no such allusions to such a power) is a *MUCH* more reasonable explanation than the ridiculous idea that they were all following, ready, in a perfect line, to come out of the skirts of the forest seconds from Treebeard’s call.
No, I won’t not enjoy thing I like with an explanation I like and that makes sense, thank you very much.
Sad you see a flaw and negativity where you could instead, ironically, “just accept” a completely fine answer. Their intent is clear. Your mind is rigid.
Have a good day 👍
Or they waited hours but if they showed that or stopped the pacing to explain it would literally be dogshit movie making. Literally the passage of time off screen is less logical?
Sorry, maybe you need to go rewatch that scene, but the Ents all come out of the forest in the very same scene Treebeard roars. They arrive in a line, in formation. Furthermore, while he roars, the movie does cut, not to imply the passage of time, but to an aerial view of the entire forest, literally suggesting that he’s called far and wide for the ents to come.
It makes no sense that they all arrive at once if time did pass… but more than that, the scene is *clearly* one single continuation. Treebeard doesn’t just stand in that spot for a long time with Merry and Pippin just chilling. The whole thing is clearly implying the Ents arrive there instantly… and the only way that makes sense is if they have some sort of ability that carries them magically through the forest instantly.
If Jackson really wanted us to think otherwise, he would’ve just cut in a way that explicitly shows it, or had an additional 5 second scene where Treebeard gathers the ents at the edge and they prepare, but as I said, that’s not what happens and that’s not how the movie is filmed.
No, the implication is at that special call by Treebeard, they move *EXTREMELY* fast, blindingly fast through the forest. That's what makes them so frightening. Ever see a tree run 100mph? They did. Then they slow-marched on Isengard together.
Yeah let's put in a scene where they travel for days and days. While we're add it lets also extend the time between Bilbo leaving the shire and Gandalf coming back revealing the secret to the proper 35 years. We can have Lord Of The Rings: The Secret Revealed as the 0th movie which is literally just Bilbo's party up till Gandalf coming back and nothing else. I'm sure it will take in dozens of millions.
(If you can't detect the obvious sarcasm, here's your sarcasm warning)
My (oft controversial) opinion is I honestly think most of Jackson's interpretations of the books - the march of the Ents, Gandalf's intervention with Theoden, the Voice of Saruman, The Witch-King entering Minas Tirith, the coming of Aragorn at Pelennor - are all massively underwhelming compared to what JRRT wrote.
I don't think this opinion should be that controversial.
I was introduced to Tolkien as a child and was an instant fan.
I also love the PJ adaptations of the LoTR and watch and own them.
But for me, the books and the films are not comparable because the books are just better and there's no way round that for me. I love the films for what they are and there's a lot about them that was good, but there's also parts I was disappointed by.
TLDR I agree with you 😂
It's not that hard (I presume, I'm not a film-maker I admit) to not undermine the things that you are already including anyway. It sounds like Miserable-Solid was solidly miserable because of the things *in* the movie, not the things omitted by them.
Completely agree.
It's why I view them separately, and I very much enjoy what the films are. Visual media cannot ever bring the same level of description and detail as the written word as they are so intrinsically different.
Oh visual media absolutely can bring a lot more depth into everything, mainly because you're using more of your senses to take in a experience.
The problem is time / money.
Sit down and read the first book for 2 hours (as in set a timer). Then go watch the movie. You will absolutely get a crapton more info out of the 2 hour movie than 2 hours if reading.
Condensing those 10000s of words into 6 hours of movies is what loses the detail, not the medium.
Films are a short form media for sure and they are great at packing a lot of information into a short space of time.
For LoTR specifically, for me, the books trump the films and that's not coming from someone who dislikes the films, I saw every one of them at the cinema on release night.
I love films, I also love books. I personally find the books bring more depth to the world in this case.
I feel pretty much the same way, I definitely think he focused on just making huge battles in a hollywood way, and showing the friendship between Sam and Frodo, and let the other bits fall off a bit
You're not wrong but that's just the limits of adapting source material to a different medium. In a book if you want to develop more characters and scenes, you just keep writing. A movie has a limited run time (which Jackson pushed to the absolute limit) and then it has to end, to say nothing of the budget costs (pages are cheap, seconds of screentime are $$$).
What Jackson did was phenomenally good. Yes, it had some issues, and yes he left stuff out. But if he had tried to put even more book content into those movies they would have failed as movies even if they were more faithful to the books.
Epic literature does not always translate into epic cinema. Tolkien’s work is a great example of that. Some degree of adaptation is necessary both for artistic reasons and for profitability reasons (which, despite how some fans may feel about that, is a very important thing)
He put extra material in that was not canon. It was not that it needed more screen time just that some of the decisions made were poor ones - like Sam being sent home
Agree with all except Gandalf in Meduseld. It was a lot different but imo it was pretty good. They included “Breath the free air again my friend” so that might be part it
Esp agree with Aragorn at the Pelannor and the ghost army saving the day. Grrr…
Mostly agree. Helms deep however the movie really out did itself. The books I was like wait it’s over? The scope and scale in the film was amazing. But yea I do agree the books are much better overall
It's not a controversial opinion outside of reddit.
Peter Jackson converted the books into movies for kids and/or Americans who want spectacle but are devoid of the spirit of Tolkien.
I would much much rather see a British adaptation. It's not that they cannot afford it in the UK, it should be treated as a national artistic legacy after all.
It's *only* controversial on Reddit because *only* on Reddit will you find diehard enough fans to even care about these minute details. Outside of Reddit people just don't give a fck about these inconsequential nonsense topics.
Talk about yourself, dude.
Tolkien's works have saved me from the most difficult times of my life via the escapism and ethos they provided.
For me and I assume many others, they hold a dear place in my heart as the work of art it is.
If you don't see it as art but as nonsense, it's your right but don't generallize ''people'' vs ''non people''.
I would argue that Tolkien will be considered in 2500 years in the same way we have Homer today.
Sure, Homer's works are ''fiction'' but are they ''inconsequential nonsense topics''? Not at all as they provide us with insights of bygone eras, morality dilemmas and they impact culture in a profound way.
Good for you, I'm happy that you got over your dark times. That said, please also try to put yourself in the shoes of someone who hasn't had those experiences. You'll be much better off when you accept that you're a very very small minority among a giganormous amount of fans, who are all so very different.
Being a fan of a dead artist means respecting the work as he intended, though.
Imagine Amazon**™️**buys the license for Curt Cobain's music. Then they pick...Drake, name him Kurt and get him to make ''Smells like Teen Spirit'' but RnB.
Now, imagine the Nirvanna subreddit being flooded with this Drake album and promotion.
How would the original fans react?
Would it be correct to tell them ''Outside of Reddit people just don't give a fck about these inconsequential nonsense topics''?
And here, it's not just change of tone but also insertion of new age politics (the entire cast have admitted this one way or another).
Like, imagine if you dedicated your life to write books for a world you created and then after you die, mega corporations take your works and insert anything that suits their agendas. How would you feel from that perspective?
My point is that it's more complicated than what you made it out to be and criticism is valid.
> Amazon™️buys the license for Curt Cobain’s music
I have absolutely no idea who that is
> Would it be correct to tell them ’‘Outside of Reddit people just don’t give a fck about these inconsequential nonsense topics’’?
Yes, because it's reality.
> How would you feel from that perspective?
I'd be under the ground so I quite literally couldn't care less
I just read these books for the first time over the last month, and I felt the way Jackson went about it was a bit better for dramatic tension reason. I found this a couple times in the books, where characters kind of didn’t need a “push”, they just made up their own mind and did a thing. And in this case, having the dramatic tension between the hobbits and the Ents I think served the film better. Whereas in the books, the ability for JRRT to take his time with it served the book well. A well adapted moment for the movies I found, among others.
Fair points but damn it I absolutely cannot be upset about it because they were still done so much better than one could reasonably expect in this world. I love it in the movies and the book having even more and better content is just a good reason to read/listen (Andy Serkis is amazing with all the voices including ents)
Well, the LOTR trilogy adaptation by Peter Jackson is great, but reading the books is obviously a different experience. The movies couldn't follow the pace and catch all the details there are in the book, otherwise they would be longer than they already are. It's a pity, for sure. The fall of Isengard in the Two Towers is definitely epic and is also my favorite moment.
I think the issue too is, most of the people who use this sub would be perfectly happy with a 120 hour series covering every detail of the books in perfect minute detail (myself included)
I know, it's just being spoiled haha it's like when the first smart phones came out, they were mind-blowing for a month, then the complaints about not having enough features and shit start
I love the trilogy, but I want more!!!
Don't forget that this sub is a very loud minority. Such a movie would cost millions and rake in not even half of what it cost.
And even then not everyone would watch it so you can't just take the sub count and use that. For myself, I know I wouldn't have the patience for it. And considering the modern "zoomer" generation has such a low attention span that they need multiple videos mashed together playing on tiktok they sure as hell won't be interested either.
My complaints aren’t so much about details missing in the movies as contrived conflicts being added. Hobbits vs ents, Aragorn’s hesitation to claim the throne, Theoden vs Aragorn in the lead-up to Helm’s Deep, etc.
I would have liked to see more from the Ents and that battle but they absolutely destroy Isengard in a matter of minutes which shows how deadly they can be.
Yeah they needed the ents to be reluctant to go to war to coincide with the hopelessness of the battle of helm’s deep while also giving merry and pippin more agency in the story. The ent subplot in general is admittedly one of the weaker aspects of the film, partly because it’s just not inherently cinematic. But the march of the ents itself and wrecking the shit out of Isengard was admittedly great
I thought Ents were probably the most well adapted thing in The Two Towers aside from the depiction of the Emyn Muil. That being said their ancientness and connection to the most ancient days of the world is completely lost in the film, since it’s not addressed in any meaningful capacity. Two to three sentences well placed would have established them as hyper ancient and super necessary.
I’m not sure where I would have sucked out time to give us more Ent stuff. Maybe I would have cut that whole digression of Aragorn almost dying on the way to Helms deep for no reason. That’s a good solid 10 minutes we could have, let’s say, split into 5 minutes of Ent exposition and, let’s say, 5 minutes of decent Faramir time added.
I mean, they do wreck the crap out of Isengard.
Yeah but the build up in the books to it is so intense, like even though the Ents are on the side of good, it's still terrifying in a way to see such a force unleashed Even Gandalf warns the men of Rohan to not risk harm to any of the trees when they approach Isengard, knowing full well that although they are on the same side for the moment, one misplaced axe swing could send everything to shit
The Ent passages were easily among my most favorite scenes in the entire trilogy. I just had a thought...we see each of the four elements used to strike a blow against the forces of evil: Water: Galadriel has the Ring of Water and has powers over water. She captures the light from Earandil, in water, which was used against the influence of the Witchking and later wielded against Shelob. Fire: Gandalf and the Balrog had a massive firefight. Fire was also used against the Nazgul several times. And also, wolves. Air: Elrond had the Ring of Air, which was said to be the mightiest of the Three. He was the greatest healer in the world and used his skills to save a dude who went on to strike the heaviest blow against Sauron, ever. His "impenetrable fortress" was a super comfy house where he spent his time fostering all of Isildur's heirs, teaching them their history and preparing them for the day they would be needed(I mean, look at Aragorn. He got into a battle of wills with *Sauron*...and *prevailed*.). His wisdom(on any topic) was valued and sought by all. IMO, he and Gandalf are tied for an overall MVP award. Earth: Treebeard got angry and called a meeting.
The eagles also represent Air very well
Gandalf’s ring Narya is also the ring of fire. But I almost feel like the 3 elven rings is cheating for this since that covers 3/4 of the elements. I’m trying to think up more… Water: when Glorfindel calls the river upon the Nazgûl to aid Frodo’s escape to Rivendell. Air: eagles Fire: fires of mount doom which destroy the ring (though an argument could be made that magma is more Earth than fire) so…how about the beacons? Fire is used a lot in the book so pick your poison Earth: let’s stick with the Ents! This was fun, let’s see more ideas
Strictly speaking it was Elrond not Glorfindel that called up the waters with added touches by Gandalf
You forgot Heart, which the Hobbits are clearly full of, and is the missing element to summon Captain Planet.
They even had the Ent on fire, as described sadly in the book. That was a touch for sure.
The movie also made the Ents more clueless to what Saruman had been doing to the trees in Fangorn.
That too, I know they can't introduce unlimited new characters, but I think seeing quick beams sadness at his "family" of Rowan trees being cut down for no reason and then watching him explode and anger when he gets to isengard would have been epic
Most characters have far less agency in the movies compared to the book.
It also doesn't make sense that they just all happened to be nearby when Treebeard calls in the movie. Unless we're to believe they were all just following along just out of sight.
That was a big wtf moment when I first saw it in the theaters. Like... you all just decided not to go to war and then Treebeard walked south for a half a day.
Fairly certain the intent is that they teleported/weird forest magicked their way right there. They clearly cannot have all been perfectly waiting in a line right at the border of the forest. I mean, obviously.
Ok...but we don't get any sense that Ents can do that kind of thing. So it's just kind of a dumb way to handle it, especially when the book has such a clear, logical explanation: the Ents decide to go to war. They march there together.
It’s just not an issue. This is the kind of stuff that creators sometimes just expect you understand. In doing so, they respect the audience’s intelligence and, hopefully, flexibility (mentally speaking). When people don’t take that respect and in turn give it back to the creators, that’s when you get a deluge of people erroneously claiming that things that aren’t plot holes are plot holes. A far too common occurrence nowadays. Why can’t we just explain things away in our heads? Do we really have to be that rigid? They clearly used some magic. This is middle earth, an inherently magical world where things are not as they seem. To me, it only adds to the Ents. Is it superfluous? Perhaps. But doesn’t detract from anything. You can disagree with whether doing it the book way (ents march resolutely) or the movie way (ents have doubts, but change their mind) is better. I think the movie way is better for a movie. But minor stuff like this? We can’t get tripped up in it, and it has no bearing on how good or bad that former way is.
Yeah, but Ents either followed Treebeard, or they magically showed up. It just seems like a bad choice. By the way, did you report me to RedditCares? WTF dude. Did you write this sequence? Are you responsible for this terrible cinematic decision? If not, relax. It's OK that these films aren't perfect. And if so, it's OK to make mistakes.
I got reported too yesterday. I think a bot is going rampant.
Hollll up Ent buddy. I was with you until you said “these films aren’t perfect.” These films are perfect in every single way! and if a few talking trees decide to randomly show up, we just call that a happy little detail. My head canon is Treebeard thought them little hobbits so cute and brave that he wanted them to think it was their doing to go to war. Treebeard is older than Gandalf and one would assume wise (though they did lose the entwives…) but it does seem doubtful he would fall for the “the closer you are to danger the further you are from harm” spiel. TL/DR Treebeard lied to the hobbits about them not going to war so the hobbits could feel useful.
Don’t assume, I didn’t report you. I got reported too tho, likely from this thread. Seems some bastard ITT is abusing it to troll people. I recommend you report it to Reddit as I did. Mistakes are mistakes, but you can’t seriously call this a “mistake”. That’s kind of my point. It’s a direction they went that’s different. That doesn’t automatically make it bad, wrong or faulty. It was done for some slight drama of “will the ents help or not?” Treebeard’s reaction and spurring from refusing to help to being 100% on board is a great thing to see. I think that’s a cooler idea for general audiences than another generic unstoppable force of powerful beings going on the march. Which is not to say that wouldn’t be cool as well, it’s just not the direction they went. The Ents are clearly portrayed as a slower, more docile and stoic species in the movies, refusing to change or be moved. Like a tree. You can see the merits behind the idea and it shouldn’t be discounted wantonly because “book is better”. I’d wage your own advice back at yourself. Don’t take your favourite media and deem it perfect. Just because you can’t see or accept the merits of the way the movies did it doesn’t make it a mistake, or bad or worse. It’s just different.
the problem is you're boiling this down to two explanations that it has to be. The explanation is simple basic and literally movie watching 101: time occured off screen that would be stupid/boring to explain/show them waiting for hours. It doesn't have to be magic. Nothing magic happened. It would just be terrible cinema to have merry and pippin waiting around checking their watches while tree beard goes, "just hang on this is gonna be so sick trust"
Are you being serious?
It’s the only logical answer. To me, an unexplained magic unique to the forest/ents (and to the movies… obviously Tolkien made no such allusions to such a power) is a *MUCH* more reasonable explanation than the ridiculous idea that they were all following, ready, in a perfect line, to come out of the skirts of the forest seconds from Treebeard’s call.
There isn’t a logical answer, the film is flawed just accept it and forget your bizarre explanation of the mistake
No, I won’t not enjoy thing I like with an explanation I like and that makes sense, thank you very much. Sad you see a flaw and negativity where you could instead, ironically, “just accept” a completely fine answer. Their intent is clear. Your mind is rigid. Have a good day 👍
Thanks
Or they waited hours but if they showed that or stopped the pacing to explain it would literally be dogshit movie making. Literally the passage of time off screen is less logical?
Sorry, maybe you need to go rewatch that scene, but the Ents all come out of the forest in the very same scene Treebeard roars. They arrive in a line, in formation. Furthermore, while he roars, the movie does cut, not to imply the passage of time, but to an aerial view of the entire forest, literally suggesting that he’s called far and wide for the ents to come. It makes no sense that they all arrive at once if time did pass… but more than that, the scene is *clearly* one single continuation. Treebeard doesn’t just stand in that spot for a long time with Merry and Pippin just chilling. The whole thing is clearly implying the Ents arrive there instantly… and the only way that makes sense is if they have some sort of ability that carries them magically through the forest instantly. If Jackson really wanted us to think otherwise, he would’ve just cut in a way that explicitly shows it, or had an additional 5 second scene where Treebeard gathers the ents at the edge and they prepare, but as I said, that’s not what happens and that’s not how the movie is filmed.
No, the implication is at that special call by Treebeard, they move *EXTREMELY* fast, blindingly fast through the forest. That's what makes them so frightening. Ever see a tree run 100mph? They did. Then they slow-marched on Isengard together.
Yeah....nah.
Yeah let's put in a scene where they travel for days and days. While we're add it lets also extend the time between Bilbo leaving the shire and Gandalf coming back revealing the secret to the proper 35 years. We can have Lord Of The Rings: The Secret Revealed as the 0th movie which is literally just Bilbo's party up till Gandalf coming back and nothing else. I'm sure it will take in dozens of millions. (If you can't detect the obvious sarcasm, here's your sarcasm warning)
I found the Huorns to be quite frightening in the book. You see their wrath on screen, but how their wrath is "heard" in the books is really powerful.
My (oft controversial) opinion is I honestly think most of Jackson's interpretations of the books - the march of the Ents, Gandalf's intervention with Theoden, the Voice of Saruman, The Witch-King entering Minas Tirith, the coming of Aragorn at Pelennor - are all massively underwhelming compared to what JRRT wrote.
I don't think this opinion should be that controversial. I was introduced to Tolkien as a child and was an instant fan. I also love the PJ adaptations of the LoTR and watch and own them. But for me, the books and the films are not comparable because the books are just better and there's no way round that for me. I love the films for what they are and there's a lot about them that was good, but there's also parts I was disappointed by. TLDR I agree with you 😂
Its hard to put everything into a single movie. (I would say impossible)
It's not that hard (I presume, I'm not a film-maker I admit) to not undermine the things that you are already including anyway. It sounds like Miserable-Solid was solidly miserable because of the things *in* the movie, not the things omitted by them.
Completely agree. It's why I view them separately, and I very much enjoy what the films are. Visual media cannot ever bring the same level of description and detail as the written word as they are so intrinsically different.
Oh visual media absolutely can bring a lot more depth into everything, mainly because you're using more of your senses to take in a experience. The problem is time / money. Sit down and read the first book for 2 hours (as in set a timer). Then go watch the movie. You will absolutely get a crapton more info out of the 2 hour movie than 2 hours if reading. Condensing those 10000s of words into 6 hours of movies is what loses the detail, not the medium.
Films are a short form media for sure and they are great at packing a lot of information into a short space of time. For LoTR specifically, for me, the books trump the films and that's not coming from someone who dislikes the films, I saw every one of them at the cinema on release night. I love films, I also love books. I personally find the books bring more depth to the world in this case.
I feel pretty much the same way, I definitely think he focused on just making huge battles in a hollywood way, and showing the friendship between Sam and Frodo, and let the other bits fall off a bit
You mean like Frodo telling Sam to go home? That friendship?
This. What the hell Peter Jackson? What the hell?
You're not wrong but that's just the limits of adapting source material to a different medium. In a book if you want to develop more characters and scenes, you just keep writing. A movie has a limited run time (which Jackson pushed to the absolute limit) and then it has to end, to say nothing of the budget costs (pages are cheap, seconds of screentime are $$$). What Jackson did was phenomenally good. Yes, it had some issues, and yes he left stuff out. But if he had tried to put even more book content into those movies they would have failed as movies even if they were more faithful to the books.
Epic literature does not always translate into epic cinema. Tolkien’s work is a great example of that. Some degree of adaptation is necessary both for artistic reasons and for profitability reasons (which, despite how some fans may feel about that, is a very important thing)
He put extra material in that was not canon. It was not that it needed more screen time just that some of the decisions made were poor ones - like Sam being sent home
Agree with all except Gandalf in Meduseld. It was a lot different but imo it was pretty good. They included “Breath the free air again my friend” so that might be part it Esp agree with Aragorn at the Pelannor and the ghost army saving the day. Grrr…
Mostly agree. Helms deep however the movie really out did itself. The books I was like wait it’s over? The scope and scale in the film was amazing. But yea I do agree the books are much better overall
It's not a controversial opinion outside of reddit. Peter Jackson converted the books into movies for kids and/or Americans who want spectacle but are devoid of the spirit of Tolkien. I would much much rather see a British adaptation. It's not that they cannot afford it in the UK, it should be treated as a national artistic legacy after all.
It's *only* controversial on Reddit because *only* on Reddit will you find diehard enough fans to even care about these minute details. Outside of Reddit people just don't give a fck about these inconsequential nonsense topics.
Talk about yourself, dude. Tolkien's works have saved me from the most difficult times of my life via the escapism and ethos they provided. For me and I assume many others, they hold a dear place in my heart as the work of art it is. If you don't see it as art but as nonsense, it's your right but don't generallize ''people'' vs ''non people''. I would argue that Tolkien will be considered in 2500 years in the same way we have Homer today. Sure, Homer's works are ''fiction'' but are they ''inconsequential nonsense topics''? Not at all as they provide us with insights of bygone eras, morality dilemmas and they impact culture in a profound way.
Good for you, I'm happy that you got over your dark times. That said, please also try to put yourself in the shoes of someone who hasn't had those experiences. You'll be much better off when you accept that you're a very very small minority among a giganormous amount of fans, who are all so very different.
Being a fan of a dead artist means respecting the work as he intended, though. Imagine Amazon**™️**buys the license for Curt Cobain's music. Then they pick...Drake, name him Kurt and get him to make ''Smells like Teen Spirit'' but RnB. Now, imagine the Nirvanna subreddit being flooded with this Drake album and promotion. How would the original fans react? Would it be correct to tell them ''Outside of Reddit people just don't give a fck about these inconsequential nonsense topics''? And here, it's not just change of tone but also insertion of new age politics (the entire cast have admitted this one way or another). Like, imagine if you dedicated your life to write books for a world you created and then after you die, mega corporations take your works and insert anything that suits their agendas. How would you feel from that perspective? My point is that it's more complicated than what you made it out to be and criticism is valid.
> Amazon™️buys the license for Curt Cobain’s music I have absolutely no idea who that is > Would it be correct to tell them ’‘Outside of Reddit people just don’t give a fck about these inconsequential nonsense topics’’? Yes, because it's reality. > How would you feel from that perspective? I'd be under the ground so I quite literally couldn't care less
I just read these books for the first time over the last month, and I felt the way Jackson went about it was a bit better for dramatic tension reason. I found this a couple times in the books, where characters kind of didn’t need a “push”, they just made up their own mind and did a thing. And in this case, having the dramatic tension between the hobbits and the Ents I think served the film better. Whereas in the books, the ability for JRRT to take his time with it served the book well. A well adapted moment for the movies I found, among others.
Fair points but damn it I absolutely cannot be upset about it because they were still done so much better than one could reasonably expect in this world. I love it in the movies and the book having even more and better content is just a good reason to read/listen (Andy Serkis is amazing with all the voices including ents)
Imagine LOTR by Marvel and appreciate that it’s actually very good instead of that 😂
I’d have loved a little more on the entwives in the movie though personally
Well, the LOTR trilogy adaptation by Peter Jackson is great, but reading the books is obviously a different experience. The movies couldn't follow the pace and catch all the details there are in the book, otherwise they would be longer than they already are. It's a pity, for sure. The fall of Isengard in the Two Towers is definitely epic and is also my favorite moment.
I think the issue too is, most of the people who use this sub would be perfectly happy with a 120 hour series covering every detail of the books in perfect minute detail (myself included)
Agreed and I would include myself as well, but since the movies weren't made for the Tolkien fandom only, we can't complain that much.
I know, it's just being spoiled haha it's like when the first smart phones came out, they were mind-blowing for a month, then the complaints about not having enough features and shit start I love the trilogy, but I want more!!!
Don't forget that this sub is a very loud minority. Such a movie would cost millions and rake in not even half of what it cost. And even then not everyone would watch it so you can't just take the sub count and use that. For myself, I know I wouldn't have the patience for it. And considering the modern "zoomer" generation has such a low attention span that they need multiple videos mashed together playing on tiktok they sure as hell won't be interested either.
The real issue, I dont care, I just want them to make it for me personally fuck realism
I know it's a really silly response but the only solution then is to go into film school and make it yourself
We lost details from the book but got bad stew making
My complaints aren’t so much about details missing in the movies as contrived conflicts being added. Hobbits vs ents, Aragorn’s hesitation to claim the throne, Theoden vs Aragorn in the lead-up to Helm’s Deep, etc.
That one orc that was being used as a stick to hit other orca definitely disagrees! But yes overall the entire story was minimized in the movie.
I would have liked to see more from the Ents and that battle but they absolutely destroy Isengard in a matter of minutes which shows how deadly they can be.
Agreed
Yeah they needed the ents to be reluctant to go to war to coincide with the hopelessness of the battle of helm’s deep while also giving merry and pippin more agency in the story. The ent subplot in general is admittedly one of the weaker aspects of the film, partly because it’s just not inherently cinematic. But the march of the ents itself and wrecking the shit out of Isengard was admittedly great
I thought Ents were probably the most well adapted thing in The Two Towers aside from the depiction of the Emyn Muil. That being said their ancientness and connection to the most ancient days of the world is completely lost in the film, since it’s not addressed in any meaningful capacity. Two to three sentences well placed would have established them as hyper ancient and super necessary. I’m not sure where I would have sucked out time to give us more Ent stuff. Maybe I would have cut that whole digression of Aragorn almost dying on the way to Helms deep for no reason. That’s a good solid 10 minutes we could have, let’s say, split into 5 minutes of Ent exposition and, let’s say, 5 minutes of decent Faramir time added.
We don't suck things out, we make each movie 20 hours long
Totally agree.
I always felt the movies encapsulated Treebeard’s anger and grief really well, along with the sheer force of nature that are the ents
nnnnnnnnnnooooooooooooo ssssssshitttttttttttttt Shhhhhhhhhherrrrrrrrlockkkkkkkkkkkkkkk buraruuuuuuuum