I HATED the movie! It had a few beautiful moments, complete with Joanie (I’ve been told) on the whistle soundtrack, but the short moments were spaced evenly through three hours of repetitive violence. The creatures they fought were hideous, and I didn’t need to see six hundred of them being slaughtered. Five would have been sufficient. I never read the book, and after seeing this movie, I have absolutely no desire to read the book. Yuck yuck yuck. I am going to have nightmares.
Jessie
I thought about the first Star Wars
movie–there were these different
and interesting personalities and
plenty of action, and the personalities
were revealed through the action.
Zipping through the asteroid field,
the Empire fighters in hot pursuit,
the protocol robot objects ‘But, sir,
the probability of negotiating an
asteroid field is 1,000,0000,0000 to 1’
and Han Solo snaps back: ‘Never tell
me the odds!’ The best action movies
are character driven.
In Kurasawa’s ‘The Seven Samurai’
the senior samurai, who is hiring
samurai to defend a village against bandits, sits at a table inside a little
hut, with his apprentice hiding behind the
open door with a club. When the first
applicant samurai strides in the apprentice
tries to smack him, the man’s arm
shoots up, grabbing the club and
throwing the apprentice head over
heels across the room. ‘What is the
meaning of this!’ he shouts.
Later the second applicant approaches
the hut (he is much less tough looking), is invited inside, steps
forward, hesitates, steps back,
and then says gently: ‘No tricks, please!’
We know instantly how deep his
martial artistry goes and who is the
better samurai.
That for me is more
satisfying than a gizillion computer
generated goblins scampering down from the roof of whatever.
The part of LOT I liked best developed
who people were and what motivated
them. The part that rather left me numb was
the effects–which often seemed to
take over the film. Reading all the
other comments, my impression is that
the stuff people missed most from
the novel had to do with motivation
and personalities. So I want to
read the novel, actually, because
what I saw on the screen, while
it wasn’t particularly bad, couldn’t
explain the powerful interest
so many people have in Tolkien.
Maybe there is no way this could
have been done right on screen.
My wife, who read the book, says
the movie succeeded in creating
the world the characters lived in.
I had no idea anyone would feel this way regarding the movie actually… I didn’t like the movie but I didn’t feel it hit top twenty in my movie violence charts (but thats just me).
Jim,
You’ve got to read all 4 books, start with the Hobbit, and then read the LoTR trilogy - Absolutely fabulous. I read them several times, 20 some years ago.
Another, (different sort of movie), everyone should check out is a recent release to video “Momento”, Best movie I’ve seen in years - totally chracter and plot driven. Right up on par with “The usual suspects”, but different. It’s gritty, entertaining, original and intellectually challenging. You can find it now at Blockbuster.
I also rented Chris Nolan’s other film "Following, which isn’t bad either.
Not up to the same standard as momento, but also excellent is “Snatch”. Guy Ritchie’s other film "Lock stock and two smoking barrels is funny, but very similar to snatch in many ways. Worth a rent though.
These films are all so much better than the typical hollywood fare. Geeze give me Fight Club over most of what’s out there any day of the week.
Jim, BTW, if you liked the Seven Samurai, you ought to look for the Lone Wolf and Cub movies if you get a chance. The titles are a little out there - “Lightning swords of Death” and “Samurai Assasin” but they are quite deep if you pay attention. Better yet, try the graphic novels, beautiful in their simplicity and incredible artwork.
(Mandatory whistle content) Anyone got some Shakuhachi music in ABC we could ape on whistle? That would be way cool.
Loren
Thanks for the reviews! We’re these
pseudo intellectuals who don’t own a
TV–but sometimes our friends let us
use their VCR (when we pay them enough).
Jessie,
I highly encourage you to read the book because it’s not that violent. I mean, they do have fights and battles, but it doesn’t describe people’s heads getting chopped off and blood flying everywhere. The book is one of the best ever written.
Happy Holidays!
Thanks for the tip Loren! “The Usual Suspects” is one of my favorite movies (liked Fight Club quite a bit too). I’ll check “Momento” out.
I enjoyed “The Fellowship of the Ring” and didn’t find it to be very violent…at least not disturbingly so.
-brett
[ This Message was edited by: Bretton on 2001-12-26 00:25 ]
As for me, I liked the movie so much I saw it twice. As a fantasy movie fanatic, the demon, and the fights were just so amazing… and this archer elf, woa, breath taking!!!
(Mandatory whistle content) Anyone got some Shakuhachi music in ABC we could ape on whistle? That would be way cool.
Loren
It would indeed be way cool, but also way difficult. The Shakuhachi is sorta like a low D whistle without a fipple-- it only has the knife edge, with no plug or windway. You supply those yourself with your lips. This makes sound production difficult, but also gives the player great flexibility with regard to bending notes, volume, and many, many other effects. In the hands ( and lips) of a master, this is one astounding flute. Not sure how you could transcribe the traditional Shakuhachi music into whistle music with ABC or any other notation system.
BTW-- it is not at all difficult to make a PVC Shakuhachi for those who are interested in exploring this fascinating instrument.
About Shakuhachi: Yeah, I know it’s not possible to get most of the nuance, that’s exactly why I said perhaps we could “ape” it 
Still, we can slide/bend well on the whistle and I think some of the bare bones tunes would sound good on our instrument…although not to a Shakuhachi player!
RE: Momento
Brett, I think you’ll dig it. I said the movie is totally character and plot driven…I should make a slight correction there: The movie does use a bit of a “Gimmick” that get’s you into right away, and most people find this fascinating, but of course the plot and characters have to carry the film.
BTW, plan to watch it twice: Watch it once and try to wrap your brain around the whole thing for a day or so, then watch it again and you’ll catch some crucial bits and pieces you missed the first time that will either confirm or deny what you’ve been thinking about…the movie. That’s all I better say, heh, heh
Loren
Wow...I went into LotR prepared to hate it, and I've actually been back twice to see it. It really was much, much better done than I had expected, and worlds better than the messes of adaptations that have been churned out previously.
JessieK, I would recommend that you read the books. My feeling about the film is that all in all, it was made for fans of the Trilogy. I think that you missed most of what made the film as good as it was because you have no background in the book - for instance, I thought Boromir's characterization and development was dead on but that's because I've read the book often enough to know, in my head, how it should unfold. Likewise, the profanity of the Orcs, the perversion of Isengard into Orthanc, and the horror of the major battle scenes (and the mastery with which they were depected) would be lost on someone who does not have the background of the Trilogy by which to appreciate what has been accomplished in the movie.
Now, there were some flaws - Breakdancer!Gandalf, the depiction of Lothlorien, and Aragorn's permitting(?!?) of Frodo to leave the fellowship, but overall, I think that the movie serves as a wonderful take on the books, although it is absolutely no substitute for reading them!
As for the violence, I agree with the statement that it is nothing compared to most of the crap that's churned out by Hollywood these days, and frankly, the violence depicted in LotR is essential in that a)this is a serious world of fantasy (as compared to the cute but ultimately neutered fantasy world of Harry Potter, for instance) and b) because without the violence, one cannot truly grasp the enormity of what the protagonists are trying to accomplish, and how brave they were to take on the quest of the Ringbearer.
Well, let it never be stated that I didn't contribute my two cents to this discussion!
~Firefly
Jessie
I agree with Firefly. Dont let a directors view of a wonderful epic story about courage,friendship and the power of “Good” winning over titanic “Evil”. The trilogy books focus on the pleasant nature of hobbits. “The Lord of the Rings” is the story of us all and the struggle for peacful utopia against the insidious evil that can grow in even the best of hearts.
Boromir’s example of wanting to use the power of evil to defeat evil has just played out in Afganistan. Only by taking on the contenance of evil can you defeat evil,at the price of a large piece of your soul. It is the purity of Frodo’s soul that allows him to bear the evil of the ring without using it. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
I agree with you Jessie, that the movie focus is on the “fringe” players of the story but should have remained focused on the plight of the hobbits and Frodo. I urge you to mindwipe the movie and read the Trilogy with a fresh viewpoint. You will not be disappointed.
I hear what you guys are saying, and I may take it into consideration and may read the book. I didn’t find any of the characters particularly appealing. I am not a heartless person and I can usually find SOMEONE in a movie to care about. I mean, I cared about good winning over evil, but I don’t think there was enough character development of Frodo or any of the others. As for the violence, frankly, I much prefer “the cute but ultimately neutered fantasy world of Harry Potter.” Hee hee.
Jessie
Books are always better because you can read what the characters are thinking; this becomes especially important in novels like Shogun where varying cultural dispositions are intrinsic to understanding. Loren, as usual, we’re on same track. I too read the four books over 20 years ago and love them. I too prefer realistic character driven non-Hollywood non-mainstream films over the star-studded money makers. How bout Miller’s Crossing and Blood Simple (Coen Bros.); Breaker Morant; John Carpenter’s first movie, the B-movie, Assault on Precinct 13; Strangers on a Train; Touch of Evil. If you haven’t already, rent and enjoy. Regards, Phil O.
Some of my favorite movies are:
Like Water for Chocolate
The Red Violin
Eat Drink Man Woman
The Piano
Almost Famous
Jessie
Jessie - Loved The Piano and Almost Famous. Another under rated recent movie that I thought was better than for example Gladiator was Wonder Boys with Michael Douglas. Phil O.
On 2001-12-26 16:39, JessieK wrote:
I hear what you guys are saying, and I may take it into consideration and may read the book. I didn’t find any of the characters particularly appealing. I am not a heartless person and I can usually find SOMEONE in a movie to care about. I mean, I cared about good winning over evil, but I don’t think there was enough character development of Frodo or any of the others. As for the violence, frankly, I much prefer “the cute but ultimately neutered fantasy world of Harry Potter.” Hee hee.
Erm...not to impose or anything, but read the books!!! (At home, I'm famous for harrying friends and family to read books I enjoy...and apparently I'm now doing the same to complete strangers. Ah well. :wink: But seriously, you will very much be missing out if you don't read the books.
Hmm. As for Harry Potter, I think it's cute series for kids, but it's so derivative of other fantasy novels out there. That being said, I just finished reading book four, and I am really impressed...you can watch Rowlings mature as an author if you stick with the series. I'm actually kinda excited for book 5 to make its appearance.
Incidentally, if you like "Eat Drink Man Woman" you really should look for a Japanese flick called "Tampopo" which inspired "Eat Drink." I won't tell you any more about "Tampopo," but from what you've written previously, I think you'd really enjoy it!
~Firefly (off to find at least one whistle-related post she can respond to!)
Hi all, what a topic!!
JessieK, all I will offer to you, is to read the books and let your imagination run wild. There have been many excellent authors in the sci-fi/fantasy world, Tolkien was one of the first and still today arguably the best.
Embrace his books, then hire out LOTR on vide/dvd after this, and I bet you will have a different opinion then. I have not seen the movie yet in Australia, Im sure I will still prefer the books though, regardless as to whether the film does the book justice.
See ya
Andy
Tampopo is great. A wonderful, warm movie and interesting view of society and friendship through the symbol of food. Like Water for Chocolate" was another great food-metaphor movie, I thought. Then of course there is The Cook, the Thief, His Wife and Her Lover, but perhaps you shouldn’t see it, Jessie. 
I thought Wonderboys was overrated and didn’t work as a film.
Harry Potter is an easy read. I enjoy it. I also like some intense books, like Lolita and The Color Purple. I don’t feel compelled to read the trilogy in question. It just doesn’t grab me. Hmph.
Jessie