The Hobbit Trilogy (Dec 14, 2012; Dec 13, 2013; Dec 17, 2014)

[radagast]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

That was Philippa Boyens, on the FOTR commentary, discussing how they improved Boromir's death scene, and she started to get into her perception of Tolkien's failings as a writer, before Peter Jackson wisely changed the subject.

Yes that's the one. They didn't improve anything. They dumbed it down for cinema and made it look like a 3 hour commercial for a video game.

[radagast]

Originally Posted by Monolithium

I think Christopher Tolkien is angry that Peter Jackson might be making more money of his father's work than he is.

Since he is making lots of money off the films as well, that is not at all likely. In fact, since he is more interested in his father's legacy more than the money, it shows what his priorities are.

[Constitution 101]

Originally Posted by radagast

So there is only two options in your mind? Either a strict adherence to the books or mangling the plot to the point that it is almost an alternate universe? As has been said over and over, by more than one person, the movies would have been better if several places in the story had been true to the books. You people who worship Jackson and these movies need to remember that there would be no movies without the books. And it still burns me that one of the script writers had the temerity to claim that they improved Tolkien's story. RUBBISH! Maybe that bothers Christopher also. It should.

Maybe it should/does bother him. All the more reason to address it w/ the person directing the film. What did he gain by refusing to meet w/ him? Maybe the very improvements you refer to could've been made beforehand, and resulted in a plot more true to the books. I guess we'll never know now, will we...or maybe I'm just worshipping Jackson and the movies again.

[radagast]

Originally Posted by legendarymatt92

I didn't suggest that he needed the money at all, simply that a by-product of such 'rampant commercialization' would be the original source material selling faster. That doesn't sound like a bad thing to me, since CT has said himself that he wishes more people would read his father's work.

I don't understand what this personal vengeance thing is all about -- you're just replying to people who have said negative things about the books. Here's an unpopular opinion with you, I guess: as influential and intelligent as the LoTR books are, they're frustratingly over-detailed and difficult to enjoy (for me).

I don't understand all the animosity towards CT. He has every right not to like the movies. I'm not replying about people saying negative things about the books. It seems that since CT doesn't like the movies there must be something wrong with him. All the CT haters should try putting themselves in his shoes.

[radagast]

Originally Posted by MoulinBlu

For the record, I meant no disrespect to Christopher Tolkein, just saying you don't see Rowling complaining about WB monumentally magnifying public interest in and the value of her creation, not to mention making her a billionaire, one of the wealthiest authors in the world, practically overnight. And the HP films omit a lot more from the original work than LotRs.

I can appreciate the desire for fidelity, but whether CT is completely ignorant of the films or not, he has no justification for being insultingly dismissive of all the attention they have brought to the original work. Assuming what's been posted here is true, that's about as ungrateful as a child pitching a tantrum because they're having hamburgers instead of pizza for dinner - you'd expect an adult to be a bit wiser, if not more mature.

You obviously don't understand his point of view, but that doesn't make him immature,. As far as Rowling goes, I haven't read her books, but did the movies take excessive liberties with the plot and change the personalities of the characters? The only thing I've heard is that the story was abridged and that some things were left out, not changed.

[Monolithium]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Hardly, he's just protective of his father's literary legacy.

Since Peter Jackson, Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens can't alter the original text, I think JRR Tolkien's literary legacy is completely safe.

The films are just adaptations. Nothing more.