New Line fined in 'Lord of the Rings' court battle

[BluOgre]

Originally Posted by gandley

there was an articule back along that claimed PeterJ would not be directing the Hobbit after this fall out. New line seem to think that PeterJ is being a greedy bastard for wanting what he is entitled to due to them not realising how sucessfull LOTR would be.

I think the hobbit is up in the air now.

That's like the keetle.......

Stuidos calling someone a greedy bastard........lol it's the greedy stuidos trying to get away with not paying their employees when something is successful. Time and time again you see studios trying to jam people or even steal their work. It's like those commericals from the stuidos about piracy.....putting the common man (whether it be a carpenter or seamstress) on there to tell how copying your DVD takes money from THEIR pocket. Of course the part you don't see is the studio execs are driving by this guy in their $500,000 car right after they filmed that. I'll bet those execs would leave that guy in the guter rather than take a hit in their salary to compensate for the "poor" common man.

[CptGreedle]

I have started the Children of Hurin, but I do not like how Christopher Tolkein writes. It is less a story and more a history lesson. Instead of including dialogue, he just says the outcome of it without any actual talking. I got bored with it and decided to read something else for now. I will finish it but I am hoping they will rewrite it with more character development, dialogue, etc. It should be a long book, but instead it is short and missing too much.

[RUR]

Originally Posted by CptGreedle

I have started the Children of Hurin, but I do not like how Christopher Tolkein writes. It is less a story and more a history lesson. Instead of including dialogue, he just says the outcome of it without any actual talking. I got bored with it and decided to read something else for now. I will finish it but I am hoping they will rewrite it with more character development, dialogue, etc. It should be a long book, but instead it is short and missing too much.

It's not Christopher's doing. Like Silmarillion and Unfinished Tales (of which Hurin is one), J.R.R. wrote it as a narrative.

[Mericalis]

Originally Posted by RUR

Sure you're not peeved just because your namesake was omitted?

Seriously, it sounds like you're as obsessed with the novel as I. And why not? A lot of respected literati consider LOTR to be the greatest fictional work of the 20th century. I've loved the book for over 40 years now, and have many gripes, large and small, with Jackson's adaptation.

In all and given the time constraints Jackson had to deal with, I thoroughly enjoyed the movie. Having said this, I had two major laments. As Wicky points out, the entire Faramir fiasco was a huge departure from the novel and robbed the story of one of its noblest characters. Secondly, throughout the entire story, Jackson (or the screenwriters) chose to rob quite a few characters of their contributions, choosing instead to attribute their roles to Aragorn. Your example of the decision to travel thru Moria is one such example. Another was Theoden's (not Aragorn's) decision to ride forth from the keep at Helm's Deep. There are many more. I suppose this was done to make Aragorn the "big hero" of the movie, but what it did for me was to diminish several important characters.

I certainly hope to live to see another, more faithful adaptation, but time's running out as I'll not be able to wait another 40 years

PS: Have you read the new Children of Hurin, yet?

Have read Children of Hurin as well...it is an adaptation of an earlier work that is listed in the Unfinished Tales. It's a good tragedy, but after I finished the last page, I felt like kicking myself for reading it (guess it was a knee-jerk reaction). But still a good tragedy.

Edit: Add in to some stuff I missed while posting this reply: This is all part of Tolkien's history that he was trying to write. Remember folks, it was his goal to create his own mythology for England. The Children of Hurin was just that...part of the history of ME.

[RUR]

Originally Posted by Mericalis

Have read Children of Hurin as well...it is an adaptation of an earlier work that is listed in the Unfinished Tales. It's a good tragedy, but after I finished the last page, I felt like kicking myself for reading it (guess it was a knee-jerk reaction). But still a good tragedy.

Edit: Add in to some stuff I missed while posting this reply: This is all part of Tolkien's history that he was trying to write. Remember folks, it was his goal to create his own mythology for England. The Children of Hurin was just that...part of the history of ME.

Yup. Not nearly as involving as LOTR due to the style and definitely not for seekers of happy endings!

[Mericalis]

Hey guys, if you want to discuss LOTR as we have with our small amount here, you might start a new thread for it or get one of the moderators to put it up as a new thread.

[RUR]

Originally Posted by Mericalis

Hey guys, if you want to discuss LOTR as we have with our small amount here, you might start a new thread for it or get one of the moderators to put it up as a new thread.

The quintessential place: http://www.theonering.net/index.shtml

[CptGreedle]

I really don't mind a tragic ending. I have lately been reading up on my H.P. Lovecraft. I would welcome a tragic ending for a change, but I wish it was not so narrative and more story telling like JRRT does. I want to hear the words they say to each other. I want to experience the emotions with the characters rather than just hearing about them.
Perhaps it isn't Christopher's doing, but I think I would prefer this story to be written more like a story and less like a history lesson, mainly cause it presents itself like it should be a story, and I think taking a little bit of slack and adding the dialogue and such would improve it drastically. I did wonder what it would be like if it was made into a film... too much would be changed but since it is so vague at times, it almost allows that change.

[radagast]

Originally Posted by RUR

Sure you're not peeved just because your namesake was omitted?

Seriously, it sounds like you're as obsessed with the novel as I. And why not? A lot of respected literati consider LOTR to be the greatest fictional work of the 20th century. I've loved the book for over 40 years now, and have many gripes, large and small, with Jackson's adaptation.

In all and given the time constraints Jackson had to deal with, I thoroughly enjoyed the movie. Having said this, I had two major laments. As Wicky points out, the entire Faramir fiasco was a huge departure from the novel and robbed the story of one of its noblest characters. Secondly, throughout the entire story, Jackson (or the screenwriters) chose to rob quite a few characters of their contributions, choosing instead to attribute their roles to Aragorn. Your example of the decision to travel thru Moria is one such example. Another was Theoden's (not Aragorn's) decision to ride forth from the keep at Helm's Deep. There are many more. I suppose this was done to make Aragorn the "big hero" of the movie, but what it did for me was to diminish several important characters.

I certainly hope to live to see another, more faithful adaptation, but time's running out as I'll not be able to wait another 40 years

PS: Have you read the new Children of Hurin, yet?

I've started it but have not finished it yet. I put it down for a while and plan on coming back soon.

And no, I am not surprised that Radagast was omitted. I'm sure that he will be dropped from the Hobbit movie as well.

[radagast]

Originally Posted by CptGreedle

and it is rare that you can make a book into a movie and not make any changes. In this case, J.R.R.T. added SO much detail to the languages, the lineage, the cultures, the complex story, etc... that it would be IMPOSSIBLE to make a good movie out of this all. And the FACT is that the film is NOT designed to cater to the already raving J.R.R. Tolkien fans, but to appeal to the rest of the world!

I disagree. My point is that the things I mentioned that were omitted COULD have been left in, and the movies would have been better, not boring or too long. Merry and Pippin for instance. They did not accidently run into Sam and Frodo. They knew what Frodo was planning on doing (of course in the books, there was a long time between the time Frodo decided to leave the Shire and when he finally did) and were determined not to let Frodo face this terrible task alone. The loyalty that Merry and Pippin felt towards Frodo was lost in the movie. THAT kind of thing makes for good moviemaking and PJ blew it. Bilbo's attendance at the Council of Elrond is another example.

It is rare that the best parts of a book sometimes make it into a screen adaptation. That doesn't mean they couldn't have. In this case PJ should have left more of the book in the script. He could have done so without ruining the movies or making them too long

[Mericalis]

Originally Posted by CptGreedle

I really don't mind a tragic ending. I have lately been reading up on my H.P. Lovecraft. I would welcome a tragic ending for a change, but I wish it was not so narrative and more story telling like JRRT does. I want to hear the words they say to each other. I want to experience the emotions with the characters rather than just hearing about them.
Perhaps it isn't Christopher's doing, but I think I would prefer this story to be written more like a story and less like a history lesson, mainly cause it presents itself like it should be a story, and I think taking a little bit of slack and adding the dialogue and such would improve it drastically. I did wonder what it would be like if it was made into a film... too much would be changed but since it is so vague at times, it almost allows that change.

LOL...That's part of the intrigue about Tolkien's ME history and his unfinished tales--yeah, they would make great movies, but it's almost like Tolkien is tempting someone to continue writing the story for themselves. His death just came too soon.

[CptGreedle]

I agree that many of the minor parts like that which often help develop characters could have been left in or unchanged, but the changes he did make did not distract from the story as a movie. It would have required more time and effort to involve Frodo selling his home and Sam, Merry, and Pippin going with him and refusing to leave him alone and setting off together. With the restriction he had, he made good choices overall.
I understand that you would rather see everyone unchanged, and i agree most things could have been left unchanged and not have hurt the story as a movie... but it would have been twice as long. Harry Potter movies are very good, and even though they are nothing compared the complexity of LotR, they cut own a ton of stuff from the books to make the movies, since there is so much in the books and would make the films too long or complicated.
It is unfortunate that J.R.R. Tolkien himself could not be here to approve and make changes to the film, I am cure many of the changes would have stayed and many would not.. it would not be the same.. it might be better, it might not... but alas we will never know what changes he would have allowed for a book to film conversion.

[CptGreedle]

Originally Posted by Mericalis

LOL...That's part of the intrigue about Tolkien's ME history and his unfinished tales--yeah, they would make great movies, but it's almost like Tolkien is tempting someone to continue writing the story for themselves. His death just came too soon.

I agree. I really wish he had the time to finish all his works, but he was so imaginative and intelligent, he put so much detail and effort into each work, that it was destined for him to leave his work unfinished since it would take another lifetime to finish what he never did.
It is enough to be able to read the works release postmortem, and it is a real loss to be unable to see how he would have finished his tales.

[Mericalis]

Originally Posted by CptGreedle

I agree. I really wish he had the time to finish all his works, but he was so imaginative and intelligent, he put so much detail and effort into each work, that it was destined for him to leave his work unfinished since it would take another lifetime to finish what he never did.
It is enough to be able to read the works release postmortem, and it is a real loss to be unable to see how he would have finished his tales.

The problem with all this is, he was trying to make a mythology and when you have aspirations of making even the smallest objects LIVE, you don't have time to expand on everything else. And his fallacy was that a mythology takes many generations to create...one man cannot do it all by himself. I guess this is why Christopher is trying to step in and continue his works, although he has been a bit unsuccessful.

But as to the fact that he didn't have time to finish everything...As Tolkiend said in his opening statements in LOTR, the only thing he completely agreed with critics on the negatives of his work was that the books were just not long enough.

Edit: BTW, I guess great minds think alike, earlier I was starting to type out things on the time restrictions part of your other comment and then I saw that you had already gotten your word in.