What change in the movies ticks you off the most?

[Child of Varda]

Frodo, probably. I know Faramir is the common answer, understandably because they twisted him beyond recognition. Other characters annoy me, such as Aragorn, Treebeard, Théoden, Elrond, Merry & Pippin, Denethor, Gimli, and others, all of whom were messed up in some way for no good reason. However, Frodo is probably, with the possible exception of Sam, the most important character to the story. I felt like they exaggerated his weaknesses and diminished his strength. I don't know about you, but I don't love Frodo because of his quickness to despair or his corruption by the One Ring. I love Frodo because of his unwavering humility and mercy—and, of course, his relationship with Sam. To me, that was one of the best parts of the book and Jackson ruined it.

As for The Hobbit, I would say time compression of the White Council. It made Sauron look somewhat weak in my opinion and it didn't need to be in the story anyway, which threatened the otherwise lighthearted tone.

 

[ZehnWaters]

Frodo's age (though I think making him younger was a good choice)
Faramir & Denethor.

Mostly though, the Elves at Helm's Deep. It was such a large and unnecessary change and is completely ignored once the battle is done. Just...why?

 

[Child of Varda]

Frodo's age (though I think making him younger was a good choice)

What do you mean?

Mostly though, the Elves at Helm's Deep. It was such a large and unnecessary change and is completely ignored once the battle is done. Just...why?

I have no idea. People wanted to kill off Haldír for no good reason, I suppose.

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

What do you mean?

I think the idea is that a 50-year-old lead character wouldn't have had the same appeal-- though Zehn may have something else in mind. This has been the subject of debate here recently; personally, I come down on the side of: 1) hobbits are longer-lived than Men; and B) Frodo's possession of the Ring would have slowed his aging even more than natural, so the casting of a "young" hobbit was reasonable.


BTW -- for newer members who haven't gotten enough ranting from this thread, here's another one from the "Good Olde Days":

My God, It Was Horrible!

All you doomsayers were right. It was absolutely horrible. I was crying in the theater. I wanted to walk out, but I didn't b/c my friends were there! All the party is screwed up, out of order, shortened. The trip to Bree was in 45 minutes or so...not 1.30 like it should've been. IT...

thetolkien.forum

I'll let you locate Parts II and III for yourselves. 😉

 

[CheriptheRipper]

Hindsight really is a great thing, funny thread to read through two decades after the fact.
Didn't know people were this outraged when the movies were being made. Could've guessed as much though I guess.

Another thing is spatial considerations. Characters appear to teleport, most notably the army of Elves from Lórien, not only to the spot they're required to be but also behind enemy lines. Spiffy!



Seriously, though, up there for stupidest moment in the movies.

I don't get why it is?

Galadriel had some sort of foresight, isn't it plausible for her to know where and when the elves should've gone?

BTW -- for newer members who haven't gotten enough ranting from this thread, here's another one from the "Good Olde Days

My God, It Was Horrible!

All you doomsayers were right. It was absolutely horrible. I was crying in the theater. I wanted to walk out, but I didn't b/c my friends were there! All the party is screwed up, out of order, shortened. The trip to Bree was in 45 minutes or so...not 1.30 like it should've been. IT...

thetolkien.forum

I'll let you locate Parts II and III for yourselves. 😉

Much obliged my g, these folks made it sound like the apocalypse. Wonder what it's like in there. Not gonna turn the replies back on are ya? 👀

Edit: read the first comment and it's boutta be banger.

 

[Ent]

Could've guessed as much though I guess.

Yep. People gotta rant.
And careful examination MAY just show may of the biggest ranters are now saying PJs stuff is "so much better" than RoP stuff. And actually give PJ a few accolades.

That said, 'ranting' is simply a matter of leapfrogging the rant from one subject to another. Some folks just aren't happy unless they're being unhappy (and making those around them unhappy as well.)

So if it wasn't RoP it would be something else. The good news.. RoP may well have kept some of the ranters HERE to rant away, rather than having them go somewhere else to find something to rant about.

So... I still personally feel RoP has been a good thing all the way around, even keeping the unhappys happy in their unhappines, and here rather than elsewhere.

(This list of 'good things' could actually grow very substantially, but I refrain... though if it caused some to rant, that would be a good thing too.)

 

[Ent]

I have no idea. People wanted to kill off Haldír for no good reason, I suppose.

My guess - probably for the 'sentimental value' from those who don't know Tolkien's work. An attempt to make Haldir accepted and respected was made. Killing him off adds some small speck to the 'tearjerker' quality of the film, does it not? Maybe for some?

Indeed, totally outside text, but possibly there was some small perceived 'reason' even if it was carried off rather minus a few key elements to help it through.

 

[CheriptheRipper]

Yep. People gotta rant.
And careful examination MAY just show may of the biggest ranters are now saying PJs stuff is "so much better" than RoP stuff. And actually give PJ a few accolades.

That said, 'ranting' is simply a matter of leapfrogging the rant from one subject to another. Some folks just aren't happy unless they're being unhappy (and making those around them unhappy as well.)

So if it wasn't RoP it would be something else. The good news.. RoP may well have kept some of the ranters HERE to rant away, rather than having them go somewhere else to find something to rant about.

So... I still personally feel RoP has been a good thing all the way around, even keeping the unhappys happy in their unhappines, and here rather than elsewhere.

(This list of 'good things' could actually grow very substantially, but I refrain... though if it caused some to rant, that would be a good thing too.)

I mean if you say so I'd be inclined to believe you but personally I'm not gonna read through 50 pages just to see who's changed their mind on what.
I've gladly not been around long enough to see people's opinions change this much with every 'new adaptation'.
It reminds me of the way folks view each star wars trilogy when a new one releases (or at least I'm supposed to believe, barely even caught the last one when it released).
If I'd be 20 years older I'd probably react the same way tbh, I'd just have to move up my current ROP complaints towards PJ's LOTR in some way or another.

 

[CheriptheRipper]

My guess - probably for the 'sentimental value' from those who don't know Tolkien's work. An attempt to make Haldir accepted and respected was made. Killing him off adds some small speck to the 'tearjerker' quality of the film, does it not? Maybe for some?

Indeed, totally outside text, but possibly there was some small perceived 'reason' even if it was carried off rather minus a few key elements to help it through.

Ah I can help you out there. I think it was supposed to reinforce the idea of Elves actually being any good (for non book readers). When I first watched it they seemed ethereal, high and mighty and whatnot but they didn't actually do any good. They were just chillin in their nice homes. Discussing what needs to be done without doing anything themselves coupled with a nice flashback of that person not doing what needed to be done.
Anyway, just my POV. Do with it as you may.

 

[Ent]

Ah I can help you out there. I think it was supposed to reinforce the idea of Elves actually being any good (for non book readers). When I first watched it they seemed ethereal, high and mighty and whatnot but they didn't actually do any good. They were just chillin in their nice homes. Discussing what needs to be done without doing anything themselves coupled with a nice flashback of that person not doing what needed to be done.

Yeah, I do tend to agree with this now that you mention it.
Not only that, but when they showed up I had the same feeling as one in the movie mentioned... "so few".
What a "token offering." Almost like a 'this is all you're worth, folks..." statement.

So... I dunno. Maybe the whole thing was best moved to the cutting room floor.

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

Not gonna turn the replies back on are ya? 👀

Is that a formal request? 😄

 

[Ent]

Yep

 

[Hisoka Morrow]

Denethor's adpation was much more accpetable in the uncut version of Two Towers due to the derivative victory of Osgilithas. Legolas, was the most unacceptable adaption for destroying much of the original spirit of the book series, in particuliar for depriving the sight of massive females XD

 

[Aldarion]

Yep. People gotta rant.
And careful examination MAY just show may of the biggest ranters are now saying PJs stuff is "so much better" than RoP stuff. And actually give PJ a few accolades.

Why would these two things necessarily exclude each other?

Bad work doesn't magically get better just because something worse has appeared. And PJ's LotR adaptation isn't even bad (unlike the Hobbit one), though it does have a lot of unnecessary changes which made it lot worse than it could have been.

 

[Ent]

Why would these two things necessarily exclude each other?

I don't think I said they're necessarily exclusive, did I?

Nor did I say the quality of the work of either PJ or RoP changed. What MAY have changed (as I noted above) is the perspective of the ones who once ONLY had rants at PJ, but now may be giving him accolades because they have a worse comparative.

If they ONLY had rants before, they were unable to conceive anything worse... or give any credence to any good in PJ's work.

This does not, of course, include all 'ranters'. Just a select group among them that 'just gotta rant' and have no other color to their perspective (until a new rantable issue comes along.)

 

[Jimbo Baggins]

I thought the movies were great. It may have spoiled a person who hasn’t read the book - the story. But with how much time they had, I thought it was executed very well. You can’t relate them because they’re quite different altogether. But of course you can relate some things.

I find that the thing the movie ruined for some people was that if they watched the movie and felt they didn’t have to read the books, they would miss out on a lot of vocabulary that was written for English imbibing and acting.

 

[Uthalin]

I find that the thing the movie ruined for some people was that if they watched the movie and felt they didn’t have to read the books,

Jimbo has hit a rather big nail smack in the middle of it's head. It's been a bit of a joke for a while now, but we are now at the point where parents and possibly Grandparents watched films and concluded there was no reason to read the book. This is passed down as normal, reading is the oddity.

 

[Vorondil]

don't give a fig about Arwen, so I was pretty disappointed when she replaced Glorfindel.

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

Oh, in that case, you'll enjoy this thread: 😃

🧝Arwen: why i hate her

join me now...may all anti Arwen's unite?!!! 1.> she does nothing other then sit around and have "HOPE" that things work out!!!! if i was her, i'd be there fight along Aragorn's side. 2.>She is so forlorn, like really id be way happier then she is if i was a gazillion (exageration) yr's...

thetolkien.forum

 

[Vorondil]

Its not that I hate Arwen, I've just never cared or been in the slightest bit interested in her, so when the replaced Glorfindel who I like as a character, I was rather annoyed.