b3ta.com board
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Messageboard » XXX » Message 2663678 (Thread)

# Again, LOTR is over-rated
but still worth a watch.

I hate those who make a point of not seing a film. 'I'm not going to watch that film because the special effects, good acting and silly budget just ruin the book that I actualy haven't read yet'....

Same holds true to Harry Potter, but that is under-rated, it's perfict if you take it for what it is, a piece of entertainment.
(I helped save b3ta! G/PP 💩💩💩💩💩&#128, Thu 22 Jan 2004, 10:42, archived)
# i thought the 1st lotr was pretty crappy
the second and third were great
there was like an hour through the third where i couldent whipe a gormless grin off my face..... it was magical stuff... (i liked the bit where the guy on fire ran off the cliff)
(Limited IQ, Thu 22 Jan 2004, 10:44, archived)
#
He ran a hell of a long way for someone on fire...
(I helped save b3ta! Waldo Dobbs was the new black, Thu 22 Jan 2004, 10:48, archived)
# LOTR
was the first novel I ever read. Have read it about 10 times since... The main reason I don't want to see the films is due to the fact that I have my own vision/idea of the scenery, characters et al in my head, and I don't want to see the film because next time I read the book I'd probably have images from the film in my head. Wouldn't like that...
(wasted industry, Thu 22 Jan 2004, 10:45, archived)
# Alternatively it could
enhance your own vision. Edoras looked a lot better in the film than I'd pictured it.
(I helped save b3ta! Waldo Dobbs was the new black, Thu 22 Jan 2004, 10:49, archived)
# I admit
that I have considered that possibility - but I'm unwilling to take the risk, due to the fact that I really *do* have very vivid personal images in my head about everything in the books. The pictures of the films which I've seen don't seem to match up thus far.
(wasted industry, Thu 22 Jan 2004, 10:53, archived)
# I kindda know what you mean,
But infact it does enhance a book, esspechaly if you know it. You recgonize small insigficant things (for example, the stone orks in LOTR, even though that was from The Hobit), and think to yourself 'cool'.

But it can kill a good book if done badly (Hands up who has seen any Steven King film that has been made in the past 3/4 years, AND read the book?)



At the end of the day, it's up to you, but it is 'ok' (My opinon is that it is a good film to have in the background with mates around, but fell asleep through the 1st and 2ed, and not bothered with the 3ed).
(I helped save b3ta! G/PP 💩💩💩💩💩&#128, Thu 22 Jan 2004, 10:52, archived)
# The Orcs
actually were in Lord of the Rings, but only in passing - when the party is walking through the forests outside Hobbiton they come across them.

One thing I think they probably should have done / should do is make a separate film of the Hobbit - it gives a much-needed description of how the One Ring came to be and how it was discovered. Also introduces Gollum and the ancestors of the ring bearers.
(wasted industry, Thu 22 Jan 2004, 10:55, archived)
# They deal with
that in the films.
(I helped save b3ta! bovine I'm so old, even my old is old, Thu 22 Jan 2004, 11:03, archived)
# Weren't they
trolls?
(I helped save b3ta! Waldo Dobbs was the new black, Thu 22 Jan 2004, 11:06, archived)
# You know...
I think you might be right. Been a while since I read the Hobbit.
(wasted industry, Thu 22 Jan 2004, 11:07, archived)
# I've only read LOTR up to the point
Just after the centinal in the forrest, Lord Dumberdill (or something like that), and from what I gathered, the whole book is 3ed-person, but if bilbo isn't there, then it doesn't explain it.

They got around that in the films by showing parts without him.

I think the director is trying to get rights to another film, but the rummor is that it won't be The Hobit. This'll be done after he does King Kong.
(I helped save b3ta! G/PP 💩💩💩💩💩&#128, Thu 22 Jan 2004, 11:08, archived)
# The Hobbit
doesn't do that - the history of the ring gets told in Fellowship of the Ring.

There's no mention of Bilbo's ring being the One Ring in The Hobbit. Because, at that point, Tolkien wasn't planning on writing more about Middle Earth.
(I helped save b3ta! Ijon Tichy, Thu 22 Jan 2004, 11:09, archived)
# Maybe
maybe not, but if you've read it 11 times, surely you'll have built quite a strong idea of how you imagine Middle Earth etc..?

If you can get past the changes, you'd probably enjoy the films - I certainly enjoyed watching them more the second time around cos I wasn't being irritated by things not happening quite how I'd like/expected.
(I helped save b3ta! Ijon Tichy, Thu 22 Jan 2004, 10:55, archived)
# You may
be right. I might watch them one day... we'll see. Anyway, I think I'm going to leave this topic now :)
(wasted industry, Thu 22 Jan 2004, 11:04, archived)
# Hear Hear
Hang your mind up on a hook by the door on the way in, and just enjoy it. Works for me.
(I helped save b3ta! Spherix What, with these feet?, Thu 22 Jan 2004, 10:45, archived)
# I've read
one of the books (simple, but very readable) and fallen asleep watching both the films (painfully dull once the jokes stop).

I've reached the conclusion that Harry Potter is okay, if you like that sort of thing.
(I helped save b3ta! Ijon Tichy, Thu 22 Jan 2004, 10:47, archived)
# Try the Audio-Books
I like them for when working, each one is about 600+ mins, with one going up to double that, so it does last a week.

And it gives you an incentive to goto work, to finish the story.

But I do agree, you do have to like that kindda thing to really feel the magic, otherwise it's just a bit of harmless fun..
(I helped save b3ta! G/PP 💩💩💩💩💩&#128, Thu 22 Jan 2004, 10:55, archived)
# Nah
I'm not a fan of audio books - much prefer to read them myself.

Besides, I've tried Harry Potter and wasn't so greatly impressed that I'm interested in reading/watching more.
(I helped save b3ta! Ijon Tichy, Thu 22 Jan 2004, 11:12, archived)