What change in the movies ticks you off the most?

one thing is the whole galadriel bieng tempted by the ring and turning into a monster and just in case we didnt get that piece of exposition she then proceeds to tell us "i have passed the test" or something to that effect.

Yes it's all very of putting but I'm told by some people that are trying to get into "the business" that it's brilliant SF, personally I was glad I had red the books because at least I knew what PJ was trying to say, I really don't think he got the message across at all

Originally posted by andyuril
one thing is the whole galadriel bieng tempted by the ring and turning into a monster and just in case we didnt get that piece of exposition she then proceeds to tell us "i have passed the test" or something to that effect.

Click to expand...

yeah this really annoyed me too....for a visual medium like cinema, did we need that brilliant piece of script writting???

if there need be evidence for the movie being "dumped" down for the audience that was the highlight

One thing that ticked me off was that they didn't show how Merry and Pippin knew about the ring


adn one thing was that how did Gandalf get his staff back when he was in Moria sauraman had it

The part where Galadriel tests herself in front of The Ring seems to be bothering alot of people...but I thought it was well done.
I think it really gave the audience a sense of how powerful she really is. The special effects were cool . I don't know...it worked for me

how incorrect it might have been, i was genuinely shocked to c galadriel change into the demon she dared not be...my heartbeat was over 200 and i felt like walking away ,my palms were like cascades of salt water ,,but i stayed and enjoyed the fact that a movie could move me at laest for a moment or two...

as for the hollywood censorship , thejosph , i fully agree with you on that part. we are constanly fooled and indoctrinised. Its scary to see implementations worked into every form of entertainment that doesn't claim 2b education.. very dangerous if there weren't men like joseph and ourselves that question every pixel of info we receive..especially when works of literature are edited into populistic forms such as films, art that is so close to our hearts like LOTR....
remember that the masses rule but there are only few who know and they control the instrument ...

a very common subject since the woII , but i'm afraid that the britsh still live too much in their victory , evrywhere i look i hear a brit shouting fascism and war , ignoring to to look positively at the future...many examples could be inserted here, but for now joseph darling, a request from alll of us .....please give us an argument or three constructing that idle axioma of yours..
refreshen our dumb minds somewhat and explain how tolkien has had fascism in his mind whilst writing for example the cottage of lost play or beren and luthien or a topic of your choice, because if you continue shouting big words this thread will become less choice

Oh Telperion, are you in for a treat now!!!!

Just thought I would wish you luck before Joe attempts to rip you limb from limb for accusing him of yelling big words, although you did also kind-of compliment him so maybe you're safe.

Although I called him a little kitten and he still made fun of my word usage so you never know.

Our Joseph is lots of bark and bite, but he's really quite endearing if you give him a chance!!

Peace,
daisy.

P.S. Of course now I'll probably get it more than you!!!

A compliment??

Wow, compliments come so seldom.

Anyway, whereas every single myth with the Silmarillion does not pertain specifically to fascism, the over-branching theme certainly does. In the case of Luthien and Beren we have Tolkien--at least to a limited degree--putting his own self into Beren. Consider the hero: an underground freedom fighter battling with a few loyal allies against the evil power of Morgoth. His friends and family who fight with him all die--a similar experience happened to Tolkien I believe when he fought in World War 1, but don't quote me on that because I could be mixing up authours--and he wanders along alone. Then Beren comes into Doriath through a hard path and falls in love with Luthien. The realm of Thingol is basically the dawn of the elves and the world preserved. It was the first great Elven kingdom of middle-earth and at that point has not changed since its beginning. Luthien the ever-young, is also a symbol of that old order of things--that dawning of man kind. Beren is yearning for the past, before the great evils of Morgoth. Much like Tolkien the men yearned for the old England, and greatly feared the coming technology. Tolkien was not a luddite but he disliked the calous way humanity was advancing it. He yearned for less technological dependent times. Here I think we can draw a link between Beren's love for the past through Luthien and Tolkien's love of the past in his more mundane life.

This adds only in lending wait to the conclusion that Morgoth and then Sauron are fascists. They have no claim to Middle-Earth, as the Valar point out that Morgoth has forsaken all responsibilities and benefits of being a Valar. He is not a monarch. He gained his power over the Orcs and the few Elves that served him through charisma or fear, the common tools of the dictator. Dictators quite often--Hitler for example--rework an existing religion and put themselves or their party at the head of it. Morgoth does this, as well. Sauron, serves Morgoth and eventually suceeds him as a dark power in middle-earth. This story line is very similar to the empowerment of Germany taking into account the first World War (The Kaiser) and the second World War (Hitler's time to shine). Furthermore, Man fights a battle against almost overwhelming odds, very similar (beyond coincidence?) to the odds England faced in many battles. The Battle of Sudden Flame can easily be compared to the battle of Britain. Plans=Dragons etc, etc. Also, Morgoth was left to build up his powers much like Hitler was. So there is also an argument that Morgoth can equal Germany and his second coming was the second World War.

In any event, I think it is a diservice to argue that Tolkien's work reflected the World War's so precisely, however, he did borrow certain themes from the wars.

Also, I now see this post jumps around a lot without any clear flow, and for that I apologize but I'm too lazy to fix it up and add stuff where needed.

Sincerely,
The Joseph

P.S. As a last bit of evidence for Tolkien's work dealing with politics consider the chapter in "the Lord of the Rings" entitled "the Scouring of the Shire". I think you'll agree our Hobbit heroes come back to a communist regime. Tolkien was dealing in politics.

Hey Joe,

Wow. What can I say? However, it really intrigues me how looking so deeply into LOTR doesn't kind of ruin it for you. I mean, when you read the books, can you separate Tolkein's alleged political inspirations from the fantasy world he created, so when you read you are in Middle Earth, and not in 1941 ?Germany?

daisy

Re: A compliment??

Originally posted by TheJospeh

P.S. As a last bit of evidence for Tolkien's work dealing with politics consider the chapter in "the Lord of the Rings" entitled "the Scouring of the Shire". I think you'll agree our Hobbit heroes come back to a communist regime. Tolkien was dealing in politics.

Click to expand...

a communist regime??? wtf??? if anything they were under another dictator installed by saruman....

I also have a problem with the term,'communist regime' being applied to the Scouring of the Shire. Communism, in its pure, 'idealistic ( think Marxist) form', is supposed to be a communal society where inhabitants work for the good of the whole and, although the inhabitants would be limited in terms of rights and freedoms as individuals, they would not necessarily be violently oppressed in a fear, terror kind of way at all times. So I would go with lilhobo and lean towards dicatatorship. But isn't this also kind-of a case of , 'if it was a dog it would bite us? in terms of obviousness?

A Grand Defense of Fascism

In the word's of F. Scott Fitzgerald, "No, communism hasn't been proven a failure, it has failed." Meaning, of course, that communism could turn out for the best in the future. However, every historical instance of communism--barring the pseud-communism of the Native Americans--has resulted in a system many would argue is much worse than fascism. Trotsky blundered along all idealistic and hopeful and got an ice pick in the back of his head for his troubles--or was it an axe?

The clear difference between the realist's view of communism and fascism is the controlling governments. A dictator is seen as almost a king. He is the first citizen, more important than all others. He is almost nobility. The communist leaders have no such public distinction since such a distinction is in essence anti-thetical to communism. Therefore, they wield power through propaganda and charisma. Or they subjugate any opponents so that their is no resistance and regardless of how disliked they are there is no alternative.

Communism also focuses more heavily on economy. Fascism can--and normally does--operate on a capitalistic basis.

Consider the Shire. Lotho, through the annonymous backings of Saruman buys up all the land or the "means of production". Woodmills, property whatever. The Hobbits are then imprisoned if they disagree with him (or Saruman once he gets there). No political opponents are allowed to rise up. The whole revolution is based on economics which does not necessarily have to do with fascism.

Furthermore, consider what Tolkien terms "gatherers and sharers". The term is almost Orwellian! "Sharers" though they don't share, is not a fascist term. The fascist has no need of such propaganda, he must only provide a bare minimum of comfort BECAUSE he is the boss, he is the most important and he tells no lies about this. However, that phrase is EXCELLENT communist propaganda.

And to answer the question of Daisy. The novel isn't ruined by my analysis of it. This is why: a lot of the allegory springs from Tolkien's subconscious mind. They are mythological archetypes, in the grand spirit of Joseph Campbell at work in Tolkien's mind. They cannot be avoided, though in retrospect Tolkien knows they exist within his work, nor does he hate them. He just realizes his novel works on two levels--the first which he pleads his readers not to ignore in his forward--and the second which is wholly different from the first, almost another novel within a novel. I can separate the two in mind, no problem.

Sincerely,
The Joseph

for your information, it is the ring that can be seen as a metaphor for communism, ie the ring is the socialist device that can be used for good, but ultimately will corrupt all in its power

the ring that empowers the One and enslaves the masses, and once the ring is destroyed so will the powers of the other rings be diminished

socialism is man's ideal of a Utopia, communism is man's pathetic attempt at it

Dont' include me!

Don't include me in that statement. Socialism definitely isn't my idea of Utopia. Anyone who believes socialism can effectively work in a democratic society is just plain wrong. And without democracy or capitalism how do you regulate the arts?? Granted popular opinion is a poor way to do it but it sure beats the hell out of letting a council of power-mad politicians decide.

Sincerely,
The Joseph

You want Utopia? Invent a time machine and go back to either Sparta or Athens. All hail the city state! All hail direct democracy!

lol.. good one daisy... the power to get lost is a very true one for the wanderer. A friend of mine and i do that from time to time , last time we were in germany in the black woods , walking in mid night and it was freezing cold , minus 15 degrees, and we then decided to get lost , to take the low road so to speak, just "guided" by the stars we were so o'erwhelmed we couldnt walk and we just sat there , completely in awe of what was or is...
the same feeling i had whilst reading LOTR ...

this i had to explain to the ones who had not read the book and only saw the movie , they all thought midddle earth was so violent.. and i know that for the larger part of its history M-E must have been so peacefull..try making a movie about that..

you also said i was in for a treat, (one shouldn't only alledge but compliment also , preferably in the same sentence)and i have been, some things you claim to be true joseph sound very plausible 2me. the fact that tolkien did have ambigious feelings about technology is very likely 2me 2. i have a book of paintings of jrrt and bklack smoke chimneys are in some...he surely loved the old days. he might have been a bit of an anachronist in his age..his love for old sagas was deep.

as for the political comparisons with the first and second darkness, meaning the end of the second and the third era , (not the destroying of the lamps and the trees by melkor) i was also very reluctant to accept that the great west whereto the elves nearly all returned was in fact the british isles.and now i acknowledge that..

but tolkien has always stated that his tellings should not be confused with an allegory of the twentieth century though some of the economic modalities of the shire are based on his experiences of poverty and he indeed lost all but one of his friends (1918). did he just say this to avoid being entitled as a political idealistic writer such as there are golding or orwell etc.

i think not . the evil comes forth out of the beginning of times where melkor sang in disharmonie with his brethren and sisters...
he was always jealous of the creating power of ilu , by the making of the elves , he tried too to produce a people and did evrything in his power to create but failed and was ashamed of his attempt thereof and of his punishment that he turned on his creator like a teenager would on his parents.. but ,said ilu , all will contribute to the glory of the final harmonie and all will have contributed to its beauty and will then see ...

Sauron was ambigous in his mind 2 about his (janus) part. in the second era he disguised himself as beautiful as he could to endow the nine and seven wth powerful rings , but he was envious of the beauty of the elves and perhaps men.

a large part odf fascism is the ideology that you are the chosen people that the parasites must be destroyed.......Sauron never intended to govern a world with a people that he contempted , namely orcs and foul things , he doesn't love them..hitler loved , (the dark-haired one loved his blond chidren , compare sauron with his children, c? its the other way around)sauron did not , there is good without evil but no evil wthout good in tolkiens work..........in our world supremacy is the key motivator of society....we understand why marx and engels were fundamentally wrong about that.... and , joseph , i understand why you like the the beginning of the days of democracy so much.... those societys were based on direct democracie for the citizans not (!) for the slaves who had no rights or were not even considered men , (let alone women).(fasces ,symbol of imperium in the time of livius)

i trust that you are a humanist joseph otherwise we should have an entirely different discussion here .... but i think its best we do that on another forum .....

telperion

Ancient Athena, an Utopia? Well, they sure did their best and a lot of the good things are stil a benefit to todays society. But their direct democracy didn't included women at all nor most of the men in the city, because they were slaves. An Utopia with slaves doesn't appeal to me.

Beside from that, how could Tolkien actually add communistic propaganda in his book? The sharers and gatheres comment does sound like that, but how much communist propaganda did enter Great Britain before and during WWII? Maybe there's a serious flaw in my knowledge, and I don't mind correction if I did get it wrong.
I always understood that it was during the Cold War that communist propaganda really became widely known by the public in the 'western' civilization as being actually communist propaganda. If true, that makes it hardly possible for a novel written before and during the 19-forties to have contained such mentionings.

But really, correct me if I'm wrong on this.

Ancient Athena, an Utopia? Well, they sure did their best and a lot of the good things are stil a benefit to todays society. But their direct democracy didn't included women at all nor most of the men in the city, because they were slaves. An Utopia with slaves doesn't appeal to me.

Beside from that, how could Tolkien actually add communistic propaganda in his book? The sharers and gatheres comment does sound like that, but how much communist propaganda did enter Great Britain before and during WWII? Maybe there's a serious flaw in my knowledge, and I don't mind correction if I did get it wrong.
I always understood that it was during the Cold War that communist propaganda really became widely known by the public in the 'western' civilization as being actually communist propaganda. If true, that makes it hardly possible for a novel written before and during the 19-forties to have contained such mentionings.

But really, correct me if I'm wrong on this one.

Galadriel Giving Gifts

Just come back from a trip to Australia and noticed on the TV ad selling the music CD that they show a quick shot of Galadriel with the Fellowship lined up and she appeared to be giving out the gifts.
I mention this because way back in the postings on this thread many a poster bemoaned the lack of these scenes. They must have been cut at final editing.

Also on same TV ad Galadriel seemed to be 'Frollicking' through the grass with someone else (Arwen?). These scenes flicked through during the ad (which I say only once) but they were definitely not from the first movie. Have nay of our Aussie brother Tolkienites seen this and can give some insight?

lookin out for the directors cut.....

Amen!!!! telperion!!!!