What change in the movies ticks you off the most?

[Chippy]

i get what both of u r saying and i am leaning towards tar and cir..

the movie is about the book, right? ok it is not exacly the same but some bits r and i am going to see the those bits...because pj didn't write those bits ..tolkien did..u have got to understand that the Whole lotr rings books can't be put on screen so..but some of it can..

 

[Iluvatar]

I have absolutely no problem with people going to see this movie and enjoying it. Go to the movie; enjoy it! Be entertained. I will think no less of you for doing so. Myself;I am no unwilling to give the bastard peter jackson any of my coin. My unwillingness is not because he has changed the novel to make it more film compatable, but because he has both changed characters (Arwen) and created characters (Lurtz). Tolkien created an extremely detailed and consistent universe; for the bastard peter jackson to disrespect it is unconsciounable, and as much as I need to see this film on the big screen, I am willing to pay the price and watch it on a bootlegged download as my personal protest against the bastard peter jackson. Join me as you will.

 

[Tar-Ancalime]

we all have our highly different opionions

 

[ReadWryt]

Hey, I keep saying it...I'm not so much angry at the changes as I am in the way that Peter Jackson is speaking out of both sides of his mouth. He claims that he is being true to the Characters as J.R.R. wrote them, and that he is a huge fan and wouldn't make radical alteration to the mass media, and then attempting to smooth the feathers of the Real fan base by explaining and making statements that NEVER get the attention of the mass media. It's as though there are TWO of him.

He's playing a game...he's trying to keep the public ill informed so that they believe he is a genius...that he has created the definative movies from the books, and yet those of us who really DO see the books as wonderous gifts, portals to a completely different world inhabbited by marvelous characters who have real motivations and are aware of the deep and glorious history of their world, instead of a really neat bunch of stories to make money off of.

 

[Tar-Ancalime]

when you put it that way... it soundsd really bad!

 

[Uminya]

Let me make an example, not to prove any particular view, but to show some similar instances.

How many of you have seen the movie, The Hunt for Red October? I'm sure at least one or two of you have. Now how many of you have read the book, AND seen the movie? The book has much more action than the movie, and scenes in the movie are conjugated from nowhere, and scenes are downplayed to the dull. Why? I don't know, but the movie was a high-profit film at the time. I like the movie, but the book was better. It is basically the same for every movie that came from a book: storyline is inexplicably altered or downplayed and irrelevant changes are made.

 

[ReadWryt]

I beg to differ. There are, as in nearly everything else, exceptions to the rule, the most striking in my recallection being "The Color Purple". The movie is nearly identical to the book...of course, it's not nearly as long a book as say Red October, and neither Spielburg, the director of The Color Purple, nor the director of the Hunt for Red October bragged about how he read the chapter from the book along with the cast imediately before shooting the scene to prove they were being accurate to the Author's intent.

 

[Beorn]

The Green Mile is a perfect replica of the book. The only difference that me, my mom, and my uncle (all together scrupulous readers) noticed was that one guy's butt was described as pimply, and we had the misfortune of finding out it wasn't...

 

[Rosie Cotton]

I may just be repeating what Ciryaher and Mike said, and if so sorry, but let me just say that even with the billions of cuts and additions PJ is making he is probably staying closer to the book then most people who have made movie adaptions of books do.

I've read the book "Girl Interuppted" which the movie is based on. The movie is one of my favorite movies, but the book is nothing like the movie. The ENTIRE climax of the film was made up for the movie. There were all sorts of subplots made up just for the movie, I mean a lot of changes were made.

The only movie I've seen based on a book that is extremely close to the book is "October Sky" out of the book "Rocket Boys." There were a few scenes in the book that were chopped out completely for the movie (similiar to the way Bombadil is cleanly chopped from FOTR), and they even got rid of the main characters nickname that is used through out the book (can you imagine what we'd be doing right now if PJ renamed Frodo?). But the movie has kept everything important to the feel of the book, and the personalities of the characters in tact. If someone asked you what the book was about and then what the movie was about you'd get the exact same description.

I think LOTR will be like October Sky, not like Girl Interuppted. PJ is changing some things around, but these changes won't interfere with the story itself. When PJ says he is keeping close to the books, and then goes and puts Arwen at the ford he isn't changing the main plot of the book, or the feel of the book. He really is staying close to JRRT's LOTR. He's only changing one small detail so the movie will appeal to a wider audience. As long as the movie LOTR still has the same main storyline, and feelings to it that makes the book LOTR so wonderful, who really cares if Bombadil is in or out, or if the ring is on a pedestal?

Whew... well now you all know my opinion.

 

[Greymantle]

In answer to your question: I do, and I know I'm not the only one.

 

[Thorin]

Amen, Grey, I'm with you all the way.

With some movies, I can understand the changes needed to be made. Cutting because of time factor and budget make sense. But when you stray from the book by needlessly changing key factors in a movie, screw up the dialogue, create characters that are not there, and replace characters' with others for no reason other then to add some sort of variety and to make money, that is unnecessary and it bothers me. It bothers me, especially when the book can stand alone on its own merit rather then needing the "help" of money grabbers who want to make it their own.

Now make that book the Lord of The Rings. The greatest novel in the 20th century, the book that has gathered a massive following for 60 years. Let's make needless changes to the story. Lets make the characters more "exciting" and "politically correct", regardless of how Tolkien wanted it. Let's take an incredible tale and alter it...for no decent reason!

Why don't we just make Lassie a cat. Down with PJ!

 

[Hein]

Dito on Thorins post

 

[Greymantle]

As usual, Thorin, we are in total agreement.
And I'm not someone who always hates "political correctness." But this is different entirely.

 

[Greymantle]

Has anyone seen the Bree video?
They're spouting lies the whole time. I mean, listen to Sean Astin's quote! He obviously hasn't read the books himself, so apparently Mr. Jackson has been lying to his own cast as well.

 

[deagolsfriend]

All I have to say is that if half the things that I have read on this board are true, I will never go to see any of these movies. I will never rent them, buy them, or even watch the promo's on TV. It is reprehensible to destroy the trilogy in this way. I have been looking forward to this/these movies since I heard that they were being made. This is garbage. It sounds like Gandalf is a stooge; what does he do, fart when you pull his beard??? Where is Christopher Tolkien during all of this???? I would rather read the books backward, word for word, than go see this debacle. I would rather see Harry Potter twenty-seven times in a row than catch the slightest glimpse of an orc-pod. And I thought the Bakshi rendition was bad! I could only get through thirty five minutes before throwing it away.

 

[Tar-Ancalime]

I'm with Cir 90%, I suppport greys points on his split advertising but i intend to enjoy the movie like cir plans too

 

[Mithrandir]

I must ay that if all the things stated by our fellow LOTR fans is true than I AM ABSOLUTELY FURIOUS How could PJ do this. LOOOOOOOOSSSSSSEEEEEEEEEERRRRRRRRRRR

I mean come on man, does he not realize how many fans he will offend, I looked @ the orc pod pics, and was absolutely horrified, it was the most disgraceful thing I had ever seen in my life.

I don't know what Christopher Tolkien has to say about this but he better say something. Also the Arwen thing really pisses me off as well, not to mention they show Aragorn kissing Arwen, yep . I don't know if any1 has seen it, cause no1 mentioned it. All I know is that it really dissapoints me, and I hope something is done about it.

 

[Tar-Ancalime]

Hollywood will overexagate any love story it's just their retarted way of expressing themselves. yes arwen makes me pissed too! I intend, I swear to see the movie enjoy and then complain!

 

[Mithrandir]

I see where your comin from. I still plan to see and enjoy the movie as well, but I will definitely be complaining afterwards

 

[ReadWryt]

Christopher's hands are tied in this matter. He has done all that he could by having his father's name removed from the title...