Bored of "The Rings"

[bordertown]

Finally got around to watching “LOTR”. What a big disappointment! I can’t believe all the hype and attention given to these movies—even an Academy Award for best pic!!!

Sure, sure–some great special effects–big whoop these days.
Great scenery—thanks to N.Z.
But the story was just plain boring. I was literally falling asleep during yet another “rousing” battle. The kid who played Frodo looked at all times as if he was about to burst into tears—probably because he knew he would again soon be at the very brink of peril ! only to be literally pulled to safety again and again and again. After too many of these episodes, you cease to care about the weepy little fella.

I am very glad they cast Ian McKellen as Gandalf—I could watch him all day. He does more with one eyebrow than all the humanly effort of most actors.

I’m not saying these were bad movies–just not at all as good as they have been portrayed by everyone. What would they do without the great N.Z. scenery and swooping helicopter shots?!?

The first two Harry Potter movies are much better in every way except for scenery.

I sincerely hope the LOTR books are better than these movies–although I am certainly not apt to pick them up after yawning through most of the DVDs.

 

[Fashina86]

okay, the movies would never match up to the books, but they are wonderful. They won’t get to be boring especially if you keep looking for symbolism in them. I guess I am just a huge fan, but every time I watch them, I can see another cool part of the book. Whatever. Harry Potter movies were pretty good too!

 

[Rand_Al_Thor]

I don’t see how you could think that. I loved the movies, though the book sure is better. I thought the casting was excellent, too.

 

[Joseph_Bilodeau]

These would not be the first movies, which, while not necessarily stinkers, do not live up to the promise of the books from which they were created. And I’m sure they wont be the last. But if you really want to give a good example of a movie that started with a good a story from an excellent book and flushed it down the toilet, The Lord of the Rings movies don’t come close. Peter Jackson’s vision, while deviating significantly from Tolkien’s canon in characters and details, still stays faithful to the morality of the story.

My vote in this category goes to *Starship Troopers. *Like The Lord of the Rings, Starship Troopers, is primarily a moral book, in this case about the morality of the Soldier. As a movie, it was reduced to a National Lampoonesque farce featuring coed shower scenes and officers shooting their own men. I imagine Heinlein is still spinning.

 

[kage_ar]

I own a paperback titled “Bored of the Rings” - it is a parody of the LOTR

 

[dennisknapp]

bordertown:

Finally got around to watching “LOTR”. What a big disappointment! I can’t believe all the hype and attention given to these movies—even an Academy Award for best pic!!!

Sure, sure–some great special effects–big whoop these days.
Great scenery—thanks to N.Z.
But the story was just plain boring. I was literally falling asleep during yet another “rousing” battle. The kid who played Frodo looked at all times as if he was about to burst into tears—probably because he knew he would again soon be at the very brink of peril ! only to be literally pulled to safety again and again and again. After too many of these episodes, you cease to care about the weepy little fella.

I am very glad they cast Ian McKellen as Gandalf—I could watch him all day. He does more with one eyebrow than all the humanly effort of most actors.

I’m not saying these were bad movies–just not at all as good as they have been portrayed by everyone. What would they do without the great N.Z. scenery and swooping helicopter shots?!?

The first two Harry Potter movies are much better in every way except for scenery.

I sincerely hope the LOTR books are better than these movies–although I am certainly not apt to pick them up after yawning through most of the DVDs.

Read the books and become an expert in the mythology, then watch the movies.

You will understand.

Peace

 

[bordertown]

dennisknapp:

Read the books and become an expert in the mythology, then watch the movies.

You will understand.

Peace

I am pretty sure I won’t bother to read the books unless something really sparks my interest at this point.
Would you mind giving me a thumbnail on the “mythology” of LOTR?? So far it seems kind of half-baked. Maybe you could enlighten me? (i don’t mean that condescendingly)

 

[dennisknapp]

bordertown:

I am pretty sure I won’t bother to read the books unless something really sparks my interest at this point.
Would you mind giving me a thumbnail on the “mythology” of LOTR?? So far it seems kind of half-baked. Maybe you could enlighten me? (i don’t mean that condescendingly)

Here is a great website that lays out the mythology.

glyphweb.com/arda/default.htm

Peace

 

[beckers]

Did you watch all 9 hours??? Most people who don’t or are bored with them give them up before they watch the whole series. The movies only make sense watched all together. One of the best things is how fluid these movies are together. It truly is just one long movie.If you don’t normal enjoy long indepth thinking epics then I wouldn’t recommend these movies to you.These movies are all about the stuggle of good vs evil and that everyone has the right and can do anything (ie the hobbits fighting, women warrior, smallest creatures with no power overthrown the mostest powerful being). These movies are beatuiful testaments to the beauty of film making. I would just like to point out that not everyone has to agree about who should receive the oscar…Come on how many people really believed that Shakespeare in Love deserved best picture over Saving Private Ryan???

Beckers

 

[Shiann]

No way does LOTR compare to Harry Potter.

That’s like comparing high end cuisine with a Happy Meal. Each are of two different “worlds” .

I do enjoy the Harry Potter stories, but as dennisknapp eluded to, Tolkien compiled a whole “history” for LOTR and associated literary works. You can’t just “sum-up” this history, you really do have to do a little reading.

If you aren’t into it, that’s cool- I never got into Seinfeld or Napoleon Dynamite, though I’ve been told I’ve missed SO MUCH!

Another site for the deeper attributes of LOTR’s:

mythictruth.com

 

[Della]

I guess one has to have a taste for the mystical in order to “get” LOTR and enjoy the story. It’s not the best adventure story ever told nor the best romance nor the best traveler’s tale but it is the best fictional history book ever written that goes far beyond mere history to embrace spirituality and the ineffable.

Tolkien was a devoted Catholic with a passion for Norse tales. He thought the ancient history of England had been overwhelmed by the Norman invasion and so set out to write a fictional history of the Anglo-Saxons with a lot of mysticism thrown in. The result was the Silmarillion, the Hobbit, and LOTR.

When you read the books, Bordertown it will help you if you understand that the hobbits are the ordinary peasantry of England caste into fairy tale characters. They are much like the real people in the wonderful true life series by James Herriot which began with “All Creatures Great and Small”. It is they who are the central characters in LOTR through whose eyes we see all the wonders of Middle Earth that lies outside of the comfortable and somewhat dull Shire that is their home.

Anyway, I hope you give LOTR a try. You might be surprised at the way the story will draw you into the magic and glory that is Tolkien’s world and imagination.

 

[bordertown]

Shiann:

No way does LOTR compare to Harry Potter.

That’s like comparing high end cuisine with a Happy Meal. Each are of two different “worlds” .

I do enjoy the Harry Potter stories, but as dennisknapp eluded to, Tolkien compiled a whole “history” for LOTR and associated literary works. You can’t just “sum-up” this history, you really do have to do a little reading.

If you aren’t into it, that’s cool- I never got into Seinfeld or Napoleon Dynamite, though I’ve been told I’ve missed SO MUCH!

Another site for the deeper attributes of LOTR’s:

mythictruth.com

You’re right—no way does LOTR compare with Harry Potter—movie wise. The first two HPs were much much much better made than the LOTR films. The people who made those HP movies, in particular Chris Columbus, show themselves to be people at the top of their craft. And no–I’m not a Potter-ite—I’ve never read those books either.
I think that a lot of LOTR fans overestimate the quality of the movies because of their love for the books.

 

[ridesawhitehors]

**I’m with you bordertown ~ I didn’t make it through the first 1/2 hour before I was looking out the window thinking of all the other things I could be doing. **
**But - I get the same restlessness with all action/adventure movies. YAWNNNNN! Seen it, been there, done that… Stimulus, stimulus, stimulus… does nothing for me. :yawn: **
Give me reality anyday.

 

[Shiann]

bordertown:

I think that a lot of LOTR fans overestimate the quality of the movies because of their love for the books.

That was a little unkind… You are insinuating that the fans of LOTR are fanatical and unintelligent… But I understand that it’s your opinion of the movie.

Different people “get” different things from their entertainment. To each his own…

 

[Mom_of_one]

bordertown:

You’re right—no way does LOTR compare with Harry Potter—movie wise. The first two HPs were much much much better made than the LOTR films. The people who made those HP movies, in particular Chris Columbus, show themselves to be people at the top of their craft. And no–I’m not a Potter-ite—I’ve never read those books either.
I think that a lot of LOTR fans overestimate the quality of the movies because of their love for the books.

I think that’s a little unfair. Yes, I absolutely loved the books. I even did a paper on them in high school. But, that did not influence what I thought about the movies. I went in expecting them to not live up to the hype and to not be true to the books. I went away loving the movies and thinking that they did an excellent job, although there were a few parts where I went “HUH? That wasn’t in the book.”

But, if you are not a fan of the movies, that’s OK. Don’t let that stop you from reading the books. They are excellent.

 

[Lisa_N]

Honestly what kind of movies DO you like Bordertown? That might be a reason you don’t like LOTR. I find so many movies absolutely inane. No plot, annoying characters; by the end of Titanic I was cheering for the iceberg and just sorry it didn’t drown all of those horrible people. Blech! Yet I have a friend who saw it three times and it’s her all time favorite. I think it depends on your interests, perspective and how familiar you are with the story.

LOTR is pretty complex and I think you probably have to know the books to get all of the subtleties. It is multifaceted, complex yet incredibly cohesive. The books create a whole world. YOu can live in them. I think the movie was amazingly close to the books.I’ve often been very disappointed by a book to movie transformation.

But to each his own. I probably wouldn’t enjoy the movies you like.

Lisa N

 

[TeriGator]

bordertown:

You’re right—no way does LOTR compare with Harry Potter—movie wise. The first two HPs were much much much better made than the LOTR films. The people who made those HP movies, in particular Chris Columbus, show themselves to be people at the top of their craft. And no–I’m not a Potter-ite—I’ve never read those books either.
I think that a lot of LOTR fans overestimate the quality of the movies because of their love for the books.

I thought exactly the opposite. The Harry Potter movies were somewhat entertaining, certainly true to the “facts” from the books and visually rather interesting, but still little better than children’s fare. I much prefer the HP books to the movies.

I have to add that in no way was I predisposed to love an LOTR movie. On the contrary, I was utterly skeptical and actually pretty darn certain that Jackson would never carry it off. You might even say that I was hostile to the whole notion.

When I saw the first movie, I was shocked and thrilled to see that he was so true to the vision of the books, and I admit that from that point on I was hooked on the movies. I still watch them whenever they come on TV, and have all 3 of the DVD’s. There are areas that I quibble with his interpretation or the changing of a character’s actions and motivations (such as turning many of Frodo’s scenes into different ways to roll his eyes up into his head), but overall I think he did a masterful job of bringing Tolkein’s vision to life.

Still, as others have pointed out, the books are much richer in detail and mythology, so there is no way to discount them based solely on the celluloid version.

 

[bordertown]

Shiann:

That was a little unkind… You are insinuating that the fans of LOTR are fanatical and unintelligent… But I understand that it’s your opinion of the movie.

Different people “get” different things from their entertainment. To each his own…

I don’t think it was unfair whatsoever. It’s obvious the fans of the book(s?) absolutely love them and have been waiting a long time for a good movie based on them----that HAS to affect their opinion about the movies.
Again–I’m not saying the movies are bad—just a lot more boring than I expected…

 

[bordertown]

Lisa N:

Honestly what kind of movies DO you like Bordertown? That might be a reason you don’t like LOTR. I find so many movies absolutely inane. No plot, annoying characters; by the end of Titanic I was cheering for the iceberg and just sorry it didn’t drown all of those horrible people. Blech! Yet I have a friend who saw it three times and it’s her all time favorite. I think it depends on your interests, perspective and how familiar you are with the story.

LOTR is pretty complex and I think you probably have to know the books to get all of the subtleties. It is multifaceted, complex yet incredibly cohesive. The books create a whole world. YOu can live in them. I think the movie was amazingly close to the books.I’ve often been very disappointed by a book to movie transformation.

But to each his own. I probably wouldn’t enjoy the movies you like.

Lisa N

Actually, I felt I was predisposed to like the movies. Adventure, romance, knights, supposedly Catholic influence etc.
I was just bored by the whole thing. Too repetitious. I actually laughed when Argyle (or whatever–Viggo M. ) went over the cliff into the river----I said out loud—“Gee, I wonder if he’s dead?”

How happy I was to see a minor character (blond elf(?)) show up at the castle for the big battle, so there would be SOMEONE who could actually die, instead of a lot of slo-mo brink-of-peril stuff.

People take this stuff too personally. It was just not what I expected and I sincerely hope the book(s?) are much much much more entertaining.

 

[Fashina86]

bordertown:

Actually, I felt I was predisposed to like the movies. Adventure, romance, knights, supposedly Catholic influence etc.
I was just bored by the whole thing. Too repetitious. I actually laughed when Argyle (or whatever–Viggo M. ) went over the cliff into the river----I said out loud—“Gee, I wonder if he’s dead?”

How happy I was to see a minor character (blond elf(?)) show up at the castle for the big battle, so there would be SOMEONE who could actually die, instead of a lot of slo-mo brink-of-peril stuff.

People take this stuff too personally. It was just not what I expected and I sincerely hope the book(s?) are much much much more entertaining.

I guess that the fantasy thing had me predisposed, but whatever. I most definately agree that the books were far better too!