LotR clean sweep at the Oscars

[The__tweaker]

:geek:

[Beefy]

He did a good job. It's EXACTLY the same as the books...

[Black Rain]

No, its not. There are sereral things that have been changed. The fight at weathertop has diffrences, and 'seeing' Gandalf 'kill' the balrog- that is NOT in the book.

I think thats its time to pull out the old, old copy of LoTH to be sure.

[Kheldar]

the books are still better :p

of course but its still pretty damn good.

[minibubba]

peter jackson himself has admitted that there are major differences between the books and the films. Just watch the DVD extras, it's all there. I'm not saying the movies weren't good, I enjoyed them quite a bit in fact, the books are just better. But aren't the books always better than the movies?

[Kheldar]

'seeing' Gandalf 'kill' the balrog- that is NOT in the book.

yes it is

there are major difference between every movie and the books themovie is based on

[Black Rain]

Yeah.....
While by no means a comprehensive, here is a list of changes.

http://www.lordotrings.com/noflash/lotrtrilogy/fotrchanges.asp

[Kheldar]

Surely all the extras were locals, but the sets, costumes, weapons, and special effects were all Hollywood.

nope - all the weapons etc were manufactured in NZ

The special effects where done on the largest install of IBM blade servers in the world - in NZ.

I was speaking to an IBM server specialist and he said it was the biggest, most powerfull IT infrastructure that IBM has every delt with.

[minibubba]

there are major difference between every movie and the books themovie is based on

for example, in the 2nd film, frodo goes to the ruined city (can't remeber the name of it). That never happened in the book, and it is a significant change.

[Kheldar]

yes that was a fairly major change

I also thought that shelob was bit disappointing - no sign of an incredible ancient intelligence

[Beefy]

NO! It was EXACTLY THE SAME!!

[Black Rain]

Thats why I'm not the biggest fan of the movies- my imagination is far better than the movies. After the first one, I realised that watching the rest would ruin my mental pictures of the books, so I won't be seeing the rest.

As for the weapons being Holywood- why bother? There are medievalists all over the world- even in NZ!

[Sunshine]

the ending was a shame, and different

[The__tweaker]

Jesus..

[dryadsoul]

Jesus..

No i believe that content is currently playing as "The Passion of Christ" So, let's not confuse the issue that seems to have been straightened out by a few avid Tolkien readers post:laugh:


And yes changes had to be made for the exclusion of the Hobbit and those viewers who had absolutely no prior knowledge of J.R.R.Tolkien's works including Smith of Wooten and Farmer Giles of Ham, in which Tom Bombadill originally appears.

Having read the Trilogy books every year since 1964, my biggest disapointment in the movies were the F**kin' sound affects. The extended DVD's illuminate more on the book in explaining things like Aragorns having been raised in Rivendell to disguise his true heritage, as well as how Smeagol became Gollum. And scenes had
to be taken out of sequence to acommodate deletions. That's all "Hollywood" license and ends up on the cutting room floor.

But, when Aragorn bent down to cut the kings foil after Frodo was smitten by the Morgoth blade of Angmar (Chief Nazgul) upon Weathertop, the sound effect of his drawing a fixed pre-midievil blade was unmistakible as anything other than the destinct click of a Buck 110 locking blade.......which made it's debute in society no earlier than 1976?

Point being that i can reclaim my long standing mental vision of the book, as it far predates the movies. And Gollum now has the truest image ever since the Hildabrandt Bro's imagery of the 70's, hell the Oscars had to invent a new catagory just for Gollums character.

But, i think i shall never again be free to read the books without headphones blasting Tolkiens score "The Road Goes Ever On", just to rid my psyche of that un-middle-earthian click.
: omg: :shrug: