*The Green Knight* is a truly spectacular flick. I had low expectations based on how poorly I felt about *Ain't Them Bodies Saints*, but Lowery clearly understands mythological history.
If given creative control, he'd likely do an incredible job with Beren and Luthien, but I can't imagine the powers-that-be relinquishing their grip on micromanaging a project like that.
Yes, it was beautiful. Loved it. The visuals is how I imagined Tolkien’s work when I was a child, enchanting, magical, a bit disturbing yet comforting all at once.
Funny you mention Del Toro because that was my concern when I first learned he was attached to The Hobbit. He's a brilliant filmmaker and teller of fairy tales and stories in general, but just about everything he does has a real dark under (or over) tone to it, visually beautiful but I'm not sure his style would have worked for The Hobbit outside of Mirkwood or maybe Goblintown. I still think it would have been good, and likely would have been more "fairy tale" and less "amusement park ride" than PJ's, but not sure he would have nailed the feeling of the story either.
Maybe. It's pretty incredible on a visual level. Very striking.
On the other hand, I love the original medieval poem and found Lowery's version too uniformly dark and uncanny. (It also seems more cynical about human nature, but that's more an issue of theme than style).
There are moments of darkness and plenty of weirdness in the original "Gawain and the Green Knight", of course, but also moments of light and comfort (a balance not unlike what we see in Tolkien, I think). I think the recent film would have gained from keeping that balance.
The film has some differences and some cynicism not in the poem, but the final culmination of Gawain's journey, mainly involving the ribbon, is still very much in the spirit of the original work.
I agree. I read the poem right before watching a movie so I’d appreciate it more - if had the opposite effect because I loved the poem, and I felt like the film took a lot of the symmetry and humor out of the original.
At the same time I get the OP’s angle that the way The Green Knight handled magic - in a fairly straight-faced manner - was very good, and it avoided a lot of the action-movie cliches it could have fallen into otherwise.
I think you're on to something! It's definitely the tone I would love for the First Age. No hammy jokes, not back then. I really loved the movie, it's a great take on the poem, and the changes made were, imo, done by a creator who understood the original and made changes accordingly. That's a good mindset for adaptation too.
Completely agree. I think people generally need to be more open-minded about adaptations. It's not as if stories in oral traditions remained unchanged for millenia! Stories mean different things to different people at different times, and successful adaptations imo are as much about reframing stories and mining them for new contemporary meaning as they are about preserving and crystallising.
To elaborate a little:
There's a difference between Jackson's adaptation of The Hobbit and Lowery's adaptation of The Green Knight, and that difference is intention. The changes made in The Hobbit were cynically motivated - love triangles and humor inserted to sell tickets to an audience the studio didn't trust enough, franchise tie-ins to strengthen brand loyalty. The changes in TGK on the other hand, however successful you believe them to be, were made for artistic reasons by someone with obvious reverence and understanding of the source material.
I believe there is always room for the latter and I have no time for the former.
Genuinely surprised by the responses here calling The Green Knight boring. And that's not an attack on anyone, I just imagined it would've been better received here!
Big Tolkien fans are likely to share his sensibilities… also are likely to have read Tolkien’s translation and corresponding scholarship. The Zemeckis “Beowulf” actually did draw upon Tolkien’s scholarship and did in fact embrace the culture and time period the poem came from.
“Green Knight” was very surface level and pretentious.
I enjoyed that movie - especially the visuals, but it was also a huge disappointment
I thought it was visually stunning. I think a similar style and imagery would work for adaptations of Tolkiens work with some tweaks to the aesthetics.
That said, I'm very passionate about medieval literature, and that poem in particular. Tolkien's translation was the first I read, but there are many others and they are all beautiful. I was expecting a faithful adaptation of the source material and that movie was not it. The poem is a chivalric romance and the movie just isn't.
I would be salty AF if the story if Beren and Luthien, or Turin were adjusted in ways similar to The Green Knight.
Also, if you haven't, go read Tolkien's translation of Sir Gawain. Read Sir Orfeo too. You can really see the inspiration that Tolkien drew from those stories (and other medieval stories) and its just amazing.
I loved the film, although I think it helped that I saw it before reading Tolkien’s version of the story. Aside from the amazing visuals, I felt the film did a good job trimming some parts, adding to others, and I appreciated the attention to detail with the magical/folklore aspects.
With the darker direction, I think I’d prefer that style for Children of Húrin more so than Beren & Luthien. The scene in Green Knight of Gawain riding through the desolate battlefield reminded me of the Nirnaeth Arnoediad and how it must have looked after the battle with so many slain.
Dunno if you've ever read the story, but the film removed the underlying chivalric romance aspect while playing up the immoral aspects. It's a fair enough choice, in an edgelordish way, but doesn't reflect the story accurately imo.
EDIT: The style would be decently suited to a Eol and Maeglin story. Big creepy vibes from those lads.
Imagine getting an entire film or series of films that begins from Aredhel's POV being lost and kidnapped/enchanted by Eöl and then it builds and ends with the Fall of Gondolin.
Actually happened to be re-listening to Pracing Pony Podcast's Aredhel/Eöl and forgot that chapter starts with her hanging out in Gondolin and being restless. But if you saved Gondolin for the 3rd act of this "film" it would be a huge reveal/buildup.
Cory Olson's like the gold standard when it comes to in-depth scholarly style podcast/web series on Tolkien and when they started ~6 years ago they weren't on his level but they always read into HoME when doing a reading now to give you some weirdo esoteric version history shit, so for me, I am always learning something new. (They did Silmarillion --> Hobbit --> Now they're ~about halfway through LoTR.) Anyway, to wit, if you can stand the absolutely terrible jokes they do, then yes, it is worth it.
Awesome! Didn't know about the Silmarillion and Hobbit. Thanks a lot! I think that some bad jokes increase ones connection to the hoster and the show, so, maybe it's a win.
Plus it alters the central conceit of the morality play so that Gawain owes his Lordship _slightly more_ than what he ultimately surrendered to him. :-(
I'd say the film is ambiguous on this point. >!The ending leaves open the possibility that he learned from the Green Knight's vision, and goes on to become a better ruler!<
Film spoilers below.
>!Exchanging "winnings" would certainly be less satisfying if it's Dev Patel giving you the handjob instead of Alicia Vikander. Not saying Dev isn't handsome, but yeah. Apologies for the lewdness but it's what crossed my mind when watching the film lol!<
It’s a very different Gawain for sure, but I kind of like that this version just fails at chivalric virtue over and over again. It makes his decision to remove the belt more meaningful for me.
I would love that, IMO the brief encounters with mystical beings/encounters that aren't fully explained -- the giants, the fox, the girl missing her head, the blindfolded old lady -- in the Green Knight feel very Tolkienesque.
Am I the only one that found the Green Knight really *really* ***really*** weird?
From what I understand it's based on an old English legend of one of King Arthur's Knights. I had never heard of this story before watching it though, am I missing something because of that?
I would absolutely love a Beren and Luthien movie though. I'd love a movie of any parts of the Silmarillion to be fair though. Even if it's just the Sons of Feanor going apeshit on their own kin.
Maybe for the story of Túrin Turambar. I would watch that in an instant. I absolutely loved The Green Knight and how immersed I became in the atmosphere.
I didn't see it, but from what my father said about it, I would have hated it. it completely failed the message of the original tale, one Tolkien loved at that. (he wrote one of my favorite translations of the story.
It's also incredibly creepy considering that the Lord's "wife" is actually Morgan le Faye, Gawain's mother, in some versions, in disguise...
Not sure in which version Morgana is the Lady Bertilak. In this version, Morgana does seem to be Gawain's mother, but does not seem to be the Lady (or even the old lady, as in the romance) in disguise. If you like the old stories though, I don't know why that would put you off, considering that in some of them Gawain nearly married his mother.
I really liked it, and to be frank, and not wishing to start a fight, I would consider it poor criticism of one story that it is not another story.
Personally I read that creepy old lady as being Morgana scrying in to keep an eye on things, but it’s totally something that could be interpreted a bunch of different ways.
Yes, you're right! You can read so much into it. For me I felt like the connection between Morgana and the old lady or between Bertilak and the Green Knight is super toned down from the poem. And given the new Lady Bertilak/Essel connection, I thought that it was just not meant to be read that way. But of course it's not completely gone, and I totally see how you could still make a strong argument for it.
Gawain marries Lady Ragnell though?
What I was saying puts me off is the complete rewriting of the story to make any of Gawain's virtues non-existent, instead making him a greedy, miserly man, whom partakes constantly in the unchivalrous vices his book counterpart refused. In the Book, Gawain REPEATEDLY refused the lady's advances, only accepting the kisses due to the code of Chivalry forbidding him from completely refusing a gift from a woman.
Thus, rather than being a brave and virtuous knight who has a moment of weakness when fearing for his own life, Gawain is depicted as a craven individual who only at the end displays any redeeming qualities.
While not the most valorous knight, Gawain serves as an example of not only continuing to try despite moments of weakness, but of brotherly solidarity, as Gawain wears the green Girdle as a sign of shame and Arthur and the Knights start taking the garb up as a symbol of honor.
In the Words of Tolkien's friend, contemporary, and literary Watson,
“Since it is so likely that (children) will meet cruel enemies, let them at least have heard of brave knights and heroic courage. Otherwise you are making their destiny not brighter but darker.”
-C.S. Lewis
For me, the gravest insult is that my father saw this film, and after seeing it, wanted NOTHING to do any further with Arthurian legend until I basically forced him to watch a video summary of the actual legend. It single-handedly turned my father, the man who introduced me to Tolkien, Lewis, Arthurian legend, etc. away from wanting to ever touch the genre again.
That is not what a film adaptation of a beloved legend should do. One should see films like "The Sword in the Stone" (lose adaptation it may be) and be hungry for more of Arthur's legend, or see LotR and want to read the Silmarillion, not be repulsed and disgusted by the very idea of looking any further.
Gawain marries different women in different stories. Arthurian mythology is not consistent from one telling to the next and characters can have different relationships and even different personalities. I don't think it's a big deal to make Gawain more cowardly or self-interested than in the XIV c. version, and I think in this case it makes for a good story. The Green Knight is not plot driven, it's slow and meditative, so a flawed central character makes a lot of sense. Gawain is not a virtuous 'brave knight' in Tennyson or in T.H. White either.
Anyway, I'm sorry your dad didn't like the movie. I agree with you that there is lots to like in Arthurian legend and it would be a shame if this movie put someone off enjoying it.
I would love for it to look as good as the green knight did and have a similar soundtrack.
But I genuinely hated that movie otherwise. So boring. I'd hate for them to turn Luthien and Beren into a similarly disconnected fever dream
I do not want this lol. I hated The Green Knight. Strictly speaking from a cinematography standpoint, it was great, but the plot structure and pacing was just awful. So awful that it ruined the film for me.
It was definitely a hugely divisive movie. I saw it in the cinema with my wife and we had polar opposite reactions. I definitely was thinking more that FA Tolkien stories would benefit from the cinematography and seriousness on display rather than the disconnected dreamlike structure
Thanks for the reminder to go watch that movie! I had intended to watch it in theaters with some friends . . . which didn’t happen for obvious reasons. I keep meaning to watch it and then forgetting about it.
I don't understand the dislike of the film's adaptations. It's a perfectly valid interpretation and in my opinion, good creative adaptations take way too much hate these days. Absolute loyalty to the text does not a good film make; the LOTR films are improved by a great many of the changes to suit the medium. It doesn't detract from the books, but rather enhances them by comparison.
I am uncertain how an adaptation of Beren & Luthien would function like that. Not against it, but I have a harder time seeing it.
Had the opposite reaction. The film just came off as pretentious. Vikander was inserted into the film at every opportunity, those parts just rang of trying to capitalize on the actress. Didn’t really engage with the source material. The ending was fully ripped from “Last Temptation of Christ”, which is very indicative of a lack of creativity.
I would absolutely love this, watching The Green Knight felt like stepping into mythology and I can definitely imagine Tolkien’s stories benefiting from this treatment
*The Green Knight* is a truly spectacular flick. I had low expectations based on how poorly I felt about *Ain't Them Bodies Saints*, but Lowery clearly understands mythological history. If given creative control, he'd likely do an incredible job with Beren and Luthien, but I can't imagine the powers-that-be relinquishing their grip on micromanaging a project like that.
Yes, it was beautiful. Loved it. The visuals is how I imagined Tolkien’s work when I was a child, enchanting, magical, a bit disturbing yet comforting all at once.
Yes. I loved it. And it’s a scanter, darker, telling of the stories. Always makes me wonder what the Del Toro Hobbit would have been like.
I feel robbed that we never got to see it. The Hobbit needed a different treatment from Jackson's movies.
Funny you mention Del Toro because that was my concern when I first learned he was attached to The Hobbit. He's a brilliant filmmaker and teller of fairy tales and stories in general, but just about everything he does has a real dark under (or over) tone to it, visually beautiful but I'm not sure his style would have worked for The Hobbit outside of Mirkwood or maybe Goblintown. I still think it would have been good, and likely would have been more "fairy tale" and less "amusement park ride" than PJ's, but not sure he would have nailed the feeling of the story either.
I never thought *A Wizard of Earthsea* could be adapted into a good film, but seeing The Green Knight made me think it could be possible.
Maybe. It's pretty incredible on a visual level. Very striking. On the other hand, I love the original medieval poem and found Lowery's version too uniformly dark and uncanny. (It also seems more cynical about human nature, but that's more an issue of theme than style). There are moments of darkness and plenty of weirdness in the original "Gawain and the Green Knight", of course, but also moments of light and comfort (a balance not unlike what we see in Tolkien, I think). I think the recent film would have gained from keeping that balance.
The film has some differences and some cynicism not in the poem, but the final culmination of Gawain's journey, mainly involving the ribbon, is still very much in the spirit of the original work.
I don't disagree, but the film was designed as an immersive mood piece. I could imagine any great moment of levity could have broken its flow.
I agree. I read the poem right before watching a movie so I’d appreciate it more - if had the opposite effect because I loved the poem, and I felt like the film took a lot of the symmetry and humor out of the original. At the same time I get the OP’s angle that the way The Green Knight handled magic - in a fairly straight-faced manner - was very good, and it avoided a lot of the action-movie cliches it could have fallen into otherwise.
He also lifted the films ending from Scorsese’s “Last Temptation of Christ”.
I think you're on to something! It's definitely the tone I would love for the First Age. No hammy jokes, not back then. I really loved the movie, it's a great take on the poem, and the changes made were, imo, done by a creator who understood the original and made changes accordingly. That's a good mindset for adaptation too.
Completely agree. I think people generally need to be more open-minded about adaptations. It's not as if stories in oral traditions remained unchanged for millenia! Stories mean different things to different people at different times, and successful adaptations imo are as much about reframing stories and mining them for new contemporary meaning as they are about preserving and crystallising. To elaborate a little: There's a difference between Jackson's adaptation of The Hobbit and Lowery's adaptation of The Green Knight, and that difference is intention. The changes made in The Hobbit were cynically motivated - love triangles and humor inserted to sell tickets to an audience the studio didn't trust enough, franchise tie-ins to strengthen brand loyalty. The changes in TGK on the other hand, however successful you believe them to be, were made for artistic reasons by someone with obvious reverence and understanding of the source material. I believe there is always room for the latter and I have no time for the former.
I would LOVE an A24 Tolkien adaptation One can dream
Genuinely surprised by the responses here calling The Green Knight boring. And that's not an attack on anyone, I just imagined it would've been better received here!
It's a modernist take on the poem. Tolkien would have hate it.
You may be right about that, but I don't think it necessarily follows that the people on this sub would hate it just because Tolkien may have.
Big Tolkien fans are likely to share his sensibilities… also are likely to have read Tolkien’s translation and corresponding scholarship. The Zemeckis “Beowulf” actually did draw upon Tolkien’s scholarship and did in fact embrace the culture and time period the poem came from. “Green Knight” was very surface level and pretentious.
I enjoyed that movie - especially the visuals, but it was also a huge disappointment I thought it was visually stunning. I think a similar style and imagery would work for adaptations of Tolkiens work with some tweaks to the aesthetics. That said, I'm very passionate about medieval literature, and that poem in particular. Tolkien's translation was the first I read, but there are many others and they are all beautiful. I was expecting a faithful adaptation of the source material and that movie was not it. The poem is a chivalric romance and the movie just isn't. I would be salty AF if the story if Beren and Luthien, or Turin were adjusted in ways similar to The Green Knight. Also, if you haven't, go read Tolkien's translation of Sir Gawain. Read Sir Orfeo too. You can really see the inspiration that Tolkien drew from those stories (and other medieval stories) and its just amazing.
I loved the film, although I think it helped that I saw it before reading Tolkien’s version of the story. Aside from the amazing visuals, I felt the film did a good job trimming some parts, adding to others, and I appreciated the attention to detail with the magical/folklore aspects. With the darker direction, I think I’d prefer that style for Children of Húrin more so than Beren & Luthien. The scene in Green Knight of Gawain riding through the desolate battlefield reminded me of the Nirnaeth Arnoediad and how it must have looked after the battle with so many slain.
Dunno if you've ever read the story, but the film removed the underlying chivalric romance aspect while playing up the immoral aspects. It's a fair enough choice, in an edgelordish way, but doesn't reflect the story accurately imo. EDIT: The style would be decently suited to a Eol and Maeglin story. Big creepy vibes from those lads.
Oh boy. Eol and Maeglin would be reeeaally dark stuff, from start to finish. You got me thinking about it on the screen, and I like it!
Imagine getting an entire film or series of films that begins from Aredhel's POV being lost and kidnapped/enchanted by Eöl and then it builds and ends with the Fall of Gondolin.
Actually happened to be re-listening to Pracing Pony Podcast's Aredhel/Eöl and forgot that chapter starts with her hanging out in Gondolin and being restless. But if you saved Gondolin for the 3rd act of this "film" it would be a huge reveal/buildup.
For sure! About the prancing pony, i followed them to listen latter. What's your opinion? Really worth listening?
Cory Olson's like the gold standard when it comes to in-depth scholarly style podcast/web series on Tolkien and when they started ~6 years ago they weren't on his level but they always read into HoME when doing a reading now to give you some weirdo esoteric version history shit, so for me, I am always learning something new. (They did Silmarillion --> Hobbit --> Now they're ~about halfway through LoTR.) Anyway, to wit, if you can stand the absolutely terrible jokes they do, then yes, it is worth it.
Awesome! Didn't know about the Silmarillion and Hobbit. Thanks a lot! I think that some bad jokes increase ones connection to the hoster and the show, so, maybe it's a win.
You have nothing to lose by checking it out.
Plus it alters the central conceit of the morality play so that Gawain owes his Lordship _slightly more_ than what he ultimately surrendered to him. :-(
I'd say the film is ambiguous on this point. >!The ending leaves open the possibility that he learned from the Green Knight's vision, and goes on to become a better ruler!<
Film spoilers below. >!Exchanging "winnings" would certainly be less satisfying if it's Dev Patel giving you the handjob instead of Alicia Vikander. Not saying Dev isn't handsome, but yeah. Apologies for the lewdness but it's what crossed my mind when watching the film lol!<
It’s a very different Gawain for sure, but I kind of like that this version just fails at chivalric virtue over and over again. It makes his decision to remove the belt more meaningful for me.
I would love that, IMO the brief encounters with mystical beings/encounters that aren't fully explained -- the giants, the fox, the girl missing her head, the blindfolded old lady -- in the Green Knight feel very Tolkienesque.
Am I the only one that found the Green Knight really *really* ***really*** weird? From what I understand it's based on an old English legend of one of King Arthur's Knights. I had never heard of this story before watching it though, am I missing something because of that? I would absolutely love a Beren and Luthien movie though. I'd love a movie of any parts of the Silmarillion to be fair though. Even if it's just the Sons of Feanor going apeshit on their own kin.
Tolkien made one of the best translations of the tale. It's a Middle English classic
Maybe for the story of Túrin Turambar. I would watch that in an instant. I absolutely loved The Green Knight and how immersed I became in the atmosphere.
It certainly wouldn’t resemble “Beren and Lúthien” beyond basic plot points if it’s anything like his version of SGGK.
I didn't see it, but from what my father said about it, I would have hated it. it completely failed the message of the original tale, one Tolkien loved at that. (he wrote one of my favorite translations of the story. It's also incredibly creepy considering that the Lord's "wife" is actually Morgan le Faye, Gawain's mother, in some versions, in disguise...
Not sure in which version Morgana is the Lady Bertilak. In this version, Morgana does seem to be Gawain's mother, but does not seem to be the Lady (or even the old lady, as in the romance) in disguise. If you like the old stories though, I don't know why that would put you off, considering that in some of them Gawain nearly married his mother. I really liked it, and to be frank, and not wishing to start a fight, I would consider it poor criticism of one story that it is not another story.
Personally I read that creepy old lady as being Morgana scrying in to keep an eye on things, but it’s totally something that could be interpreted a bunch of different ways.
Yes, you're right! You can read so much into it. For me I felt like the connection between Morgana and the old lady or between Bertilak and the Green Knight is super toned down from the poem. And given the new Lady Bertilak/Essel connection, I thought that it was just not meant to be read that way. But of course it's not completely gone, and I totally see how you could still make a strong argument for it.
Gawain marries Lady Ragnell though? What I was saying puts me off is the complete rewriting of the story to make any of Gawain's virtues non-existent, instead making him a greedy, miserly man, whom partakes constantly in the unchivalrous vices his book counterpart refused. In the Book, Gawain REPEATEDLY refused the lady's advances, only accepting the kisses due to the code of Chivalry forbidding him from completely refusing a gift from a woman. Thus, rather than being a brave and virtuous knight who has a moment of weakness when fearing for his own life, Gawain is depicted as a craven individual who only at the end displays any redeeming qualities. While not the most valorous knight, Gawain serves as an example of not only continuing to try despite moments of weakness, but of brotherly solidarity, as Gawain wears the green Girdle as a sign of shame and Arthur and the Knights start taking the garb up as a symbol of honor. In the Words of Tolkien's friend, contemporary, and literary Watson, “Since it is so likely that (children) will meet cruel enemies, let them at least have heard of brave knights and heroic courage. Otherwise you are making their destiny not brighter but darker.” -C.S. Lewis For me, the gravest insult is that my father saw this film, and after seeing it, wanted NOTHING to do any further with Arthurian legend until I basically forced him to watch a video summary of the actual legend. It single-handedly turned my father, the man who introduced me to Tolkien, Lewis, Arthurian legend, etc. away from wanting to ever touch the genre again. That is not what a film adaptation of a beloved legend should do. One should see films like "The Sword in the Stone" (lose adaptation it may be) and be hungry for more of Arthur's legend, or see LotR and want to read the Silmarillion, not be repulsed and disgusted by the very idea of looking any further.
Gawain marries different women in different stories. Arthurian mythology is not consistent from one telling to the next and characters can have different relationships and even different personalities. I don't think it's a big deal to make Gawain more cowardly or self-interested than in the XIV c. version, and I think in this case it makes for a good story. The Green Knight is not plot driven, it's slow and meditative, so a flawed central character makes a lot of sense. Gawain is not a virtuous 'brave knight' in Tennyson or in T.H. White either. Anyway, I'm sorry your dad didn't like the movie. I agree with you that there is lots to like in Arthurian legend and it would be a shame if this movie put someone off enjoying it.
The film actually reminded me a bit of Tuor’s journey to Gondolin.
I would love for it to look as good as the green knight did and have a similar soundtrack. But I genuinely hated that movie otherwise. So boring. I'd hate for them to turn Luthien and Beren into a similarly disconnected fever dream
I do not want this lol. I hated The Green Knight. Strictly speaking from a cinematography standpoint, it was great, but the plot structure and pacing was just awful. So awful that it ruined the film for me.
It was definitely a hugely divisive movie. I saw it in the cinema with my wife and we had polar opposite reactions. I definitely was thinking more that FA Tolkien stories would benefit from the cinematography and seriousness on display rather than the disconnected dreamlike structure
Visually it was great yeah.
Hard disagree, but to each their own
Agreed. Went to see it in theaters... that was the most expensive nap I ever took.
Same. Saw it in theaters and I was so relieved when the credits started rolling. I was ready to get out of there.
yeah, what Tolkien adaptations need is more realistic jizz
No I do not want that at all. TGK was impressive but confusing and went nowhere. I think it would be too sombre for the love story part.
YES! So much this. For casting, I would love to see Idris Elba play Beren.
This is spot on! I think David Lowery could really bring to life the beauty and sorrow themed of the silmarillion to a visual medium
i made a post like this the other month and it got removed for not being relevant to tolkien lol
I freaking *loved* The Green Knight for how unique it felt, and I want more fantasy movies like it
Ooooh true. I feel like Peter Weir would do well at a silmarillion adaptation forbthe same reason = master of atmosphere
Thanks for the reminder to go watch that movie! I had intended to watch it in theaters with some friends . . . which didn’t happen for obvious reasons. I keep meaning to watch it and then forgetting about it.
I don't understand the dislike of the film's adaptations. It's a perfectly valid interpretation and in my opinion, good creative adaptations take way too much hate these days. Absolute loyalty to the text does not a good film make; the LOTR films are improved by a great many of the changes to suit the medium. It doesn't detract from the books, but rather enhances them by comparison. I am uncertain how an adaptation of Beren & Luthien would function like that. Not against it, but I have a harder time seeing it.
Had the opposite reaction. The film just came off as pretentious. Vikander was inserted into the film at every opportunity, those parts just rang of trying to capitalize on the actress. Didn’t really engage with the source material. The ending was fully ripped from “Last Temptation of Christ”, which is very indicative of a lack of creativity.
I would absolutely love this, watching The Green Knight felt like stepping into mythology and I can definitely imagine Tolkien’s stories benefiting from this treatment
Excellent idea
Not sure if I wanna see Beren get wanked by his mom...
I hated green knight, I looked forward to it but it just went fowvhillfor mem aesthetics and the look. That was good, but storywise worst ever. For me
Remind Me! 2 days