Welcome to Gaia! ::

Reply Gateway to Lorien
What's the difference?

Quick Reply

Enter both words below, separated by a space:

Can't read the text? Click here

Submit

iRusco
Vice Captain

PostPosted: Sat Jun 23, 2007 3:12 pm


Since there are many differences between Tolkien's version of LotR and Jackson's, here's a place to list and discuss them.
PostPosted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 10:34 am


I get the feeling I'm going to be a regular in this thread. heart I'll make a larger post going with the subject later today.

Elrond Peredhel
Captain


Paw Pad Club President

Magnetic Explorer

6,650 Points
  • Generous 100
  • Beta Critic 0
  • Beta Treasure Hunter 0
PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2007 5:29 pm


Obviously Tolkien's version is much larger, detailed, complete. It is the original and paints pictures in a mind like no movie can replicate. I believe the largest difference is the medium that each story takes place and how long you can make it. Jackson had to fit in a whole lot in a limited space of time. Where Tolkien could fill as many pages as his heart desired.
PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 8:00 am


Tolkien is the original. The originals are always better tha the remakes

Baal_Paladin


Demoniac Evil

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 8:11 pm


The huge big humongous difference is: Tom Bombadil!
He totally disappearing...
He is the one who would have had the power to stand against the Mordor and despite his love for the Nature he did not do anything...
The first book has been changed a lot!

The second is: the change of character of Faramir.
In the book he had no after thought...he let them pass...

Here are the two I remembered at first glance...
I'll find some more or maybe develop these two smile
PostPosted: Tue Jul 10, 2007 3:13 pm


I'm sorry, but I think Jackson did a great job and Tolkien would be proud. He (Jackson) took the books to the movie level. No one could replace Tolkien and I don't think Jackson was trying to. He just brought the books to life. I loved each movie and dreaded the end. I would love to watch these characters forever.

Perrin_Wolfgard


Elrond Peredhel
Captain

PostPosted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 4:33 pm


Fair enough, each to their own. I dont' think Tolkien would have been pleased with the movies. It's not the stuff that was left out, it's the stuff that was added in that wasn't in the books.
PostPosted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 2:21 am


I have a big problem with helms deep in the movie. No elves died there in the book...

Erynion Leafblade


Demoniac Evil

PostPosted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 5:56 am


I agree with both of you.
The adding would not have pleased Tolkien.
I think for example that he would not have appreciated the bigger place taking by both women (Arwen and Eowyn).
PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2007 7:11 am


No way any author would want their work to be fiddle with

Baal_Paladin


Perrin_Wolfgard

PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:28 am


I disagree. Tolkien was a kind soul and I think he'd have been happy with the movies. Besides, if he was alive he would have worked with them. Who knows what it would have been like with him on the creative team. I'm just glad they did the movies. Differences aside, they were good movies and I think the fan base grew. New people have bought and read the books now. Tolkien lives on.
PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 11:19 pm


Perrin_Wolfgard
I disagree. Tolkien was a kind soul and I think he'd have been happy with the movies. Besides, if he was alive he would have worked with them. Who knows what it would have been like with him on the creative team. I'm just glad they did the movies. Differences aside, they were good movies and I think the fan base grew. New people have bought and read the books now. Tolkien lives on.


I AGREE WHOLEHEARTEDLY. HE MAY NOT HAVE LIKED SOME OF THE 'ARTISTIC LICENSE' THAT WAS TAKEN WITH CERTAIN EVENTS (IE ARWEN RIDING ASFALOTH TO THE RESCUE INSTEAD OF GLORFINDEL, OR THE GALADHRIM JOINING THE BATTLE AT HELM'S DEEP), BUT IF HE'D BEEN ON THE CREATIVE TEAM, I'M CERTAIN HE WOULD HAVE GREATLY ENJOYED WORKING WITH PJ AND THE ENTIRE CAST.

IN ALL THE THINGS I'VE SEEN WRITTEN BY HIM AND ABOUT HIM, HE NEVER STRUCK ME AS A NIT-PICKING TYPE OF PERSON, EXCEPT WITH REGARD TO HIS OWN PERFORMANCE (IE LEAVING THE INSANE AMOUNTS OF NOTES AND BITS OF HISTORY & LORE THAT DIDN'T MAKE IT INTO THE ORIGINAL BOOKS THAT CHRISTOPHER TOLKIEN HAS PUBLISHED FOR HIM POST-HUMOUSLY).

SO...WHILE I THINK HE AND PJ MIGHT HAVE BUTTED HEADS A BIT OVER THE BIGGER DETAILS THAT HE MESSED WITH, I THINK GENERALLY SPEAKING TOLKIEN WOULD'VE WANDERED AROUND THE SET GIVING POINTERS HERE AND THERE, CALLING OUT ENCOURAGEMENT, AND GENERALLY JUST WATCHING THE WHOLE MAKING OF THE TRILOGY LIKE A PRIVATE PLAY.

DID THAT MAKE ANY SENSE? I NEED CAFFEINE...

Lasseg of Valinor


Erynion Leafblade

PostPosted: Sat Dec 01, 2007 3:19 am


You can't rate one against the other really. They both work with different mediums. I did like the films but love the books more. And i must agree the people in the book did come alive in the film, but changing the story with add in was betraying the plot of the story.
PostPosted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 3:29 pm


I think the only reason that they gave Eowyn and Arwen larger roles is because in todays society, thats what people are looking for in movies. I mean, was it truly a TERRIBLE thing to have Arwen ride Asfaloth? I mean sure, it's annoying to get the plot to your favorite book changedm but that is what movies do.
I personally think Tolkien would have enjoyed the movies. Though it definitely
would have been great if he could could work on them w/ PJ :]

Miss Cherry Kiss


Tiqun

PostPosted: Sun Mar 23, 2008 8:26 pm


Tirithiel
I think the only reason that they gave Eowyn and Arwen larger roles is because in todays society, thats what people are looking for in movies. I mean, was it truly a TERRIBLE thing to have Arwen ride Asfaloth? I mean sure, it's annoying to get the plot to your favorite book changedm but that is what movies do.
I personally think Tolkien would have enjoyed the movies. Though it definitely
would have been great if he could could work on them w/ PJ :]


i think you're onto something there... the whole women's movement thing has had a strong influence on the way books have been made into movies, amongst a great number of other things.

i like that he had the wisdom not to make the females into the main heros or something along those lines.

the one thing that they did twist in the movie (which has angered me to no end!) is the "love triangle" they attempted to portray between aragorn, eowyn, and arwen. it tarnishes aragorn's character and belittles eowyn's fighting spirit!

the way i always read it and pictured it in the books was that eowyn was merely jealous of aragorn (and other males) ability (duty) to protect those whom they love and this she was denied. the books never mentioned a romantic interest in her relationship to aragorn. additionally, the movies make her seem weak of heart and easily swayed... when she is denied a romantic relationship with aragorn she all but leaps itno the arms of faramir!

now don't get me wrong, i love and adore faramir, he is my favourite human character from the films and the books. i just wish jackson and his crew found a more accurate and tasteful way of portraying what actually transpired according to tolkien's writings. *grin*
Reply
Gateway to Lorien

 
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games
Mini-Games
Play with GCash
Play with Platinum