The Lord of the Rings

[Fig]

Well, I figured I might as well start the first topic in here. And given that I'm a fantasy maniac, I thought I would give a nod to the "creator" of modern-days epic fantasy novels, JRR Tolkien.

Anyway, what are your thoughts on the novels (and the movies)? Anything you particularly dislike? Anything you particularly like?

 

[Tigrin]

I've read The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings... read them all about a year ago, actually, right before the first movie came out. I like the books, and I like the movies. Hobbits are just so adorable... I love the hobbit characters. I don't much care for the elves at all. I get confused sometimes because Tolkien's universe is so massive and complex, and while he knows what he's talking about most of the time when he refers to certain historical events, I haven't a clue. The books are a bit confusing in that they are very similar to Anglo-Saxon literature, taking big influences from Beowulf and such; the names are all very similar and there are lots of them, which makes it hard to distinguish between characters. Tolkien also knows his world so well he feels it necessary to put in complicated descriptions of the landscapes and in-which-direction-is-what... I just skip over the landscape descriptions most of the time and focus on the story. Sometimes I have to go back and re-read to make sure I get it.

I think the story of Lord of the Rings is very appealing to most people at this time, especially Americans, because it is very similar to world events. It's a classic, epic struggle of good trying to triumph over a greater evil. It has some good morals that people take to heart; such as in the Fellowship movie when Gandalf talks about dealing out death in judgement and fate, and in the Two Towers movie when Sam gives his speech about hanging onto what's good in the world, worth fighting for. That really resonates with audiences. The popularity of the series now is amazing, just because of the movies...

 

[Adam]

My Dad read me the hobbit when I was six, and we where well into LotR when he started making a movie and got too busy to continue... I never got round to reading the books after that. However, the BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) produced an audio dramatisation which is absoulutely brilliant, with Ian Holm as Frodo among others, and the definitive Gollum until Andy Serkiss in the movie. I loved all the books, and form an amazingly cohesive and interesting overall story that it is no wonder that LotR has become the prototypical epic series. So far I've really really enjoyed both movies, and to be honest, I don't mind that Peter Jackson has taken liberties on them - they work better as movies because of it. For example, I liked Eowyn's character in the movie version of the Two Towers far more than in the book. The movies have so far been faithful to the spirit of the books, but unafraid to devieate slightly from their storyline if it will make them work better cinematically. The cinematography is also just incredible on both movies.

 

[Katie]

happy birthday, JRR Tolkien

heh... anyway. I read the Hobbit for school in 7th grade, and I hated it, the whole class did. It was a great story, but I think the reason no one liked it was because we had deadlines like "read 4 chapters and define the vocabulary and answer these questions and write a journal entry as if you were one of the dwarfs, turn it in tomorrow" etc. (that teacher was damn mean ;-; ) I got so sick of it, I never actually finished, but still got an A on the test ^_^ I reread it last summer (didn't quite finish though.. o.o), and I really like it now! I like the movies for LOTR ok, I'll try to read the books sometime, they seem cool ^_^

I have a question, too. aparently Tolkien made up an entire language, anyone here fluent in Elvish? just curious... I've heard of people who learned it.

 

[Fig]

I could probably remember a few words of each of the many languages Tolkien created (mostly from the translation of places names) from the maps, but I'm certainly not fluent.

And then, there's figuring out what is from which language. It's been a long timse since I last checked elvenish stuff.

 

[Mew2Too]

I read the LoTR trilogy and tried to read "The Hobbit," but I didn't get very far into it before I returned it to the library. ( Though I own LoTR, so I can read those anytime. I intend on doing so every year like teh pros! )

I actually like Peter Jackson's interpretation just a little better. Tolkien wrote a series of books that possessed a large number of human frailties, truths, and triumphs. Sometimes, though, you had to dig really deep for them. Peter Jackson does that for you in the movies. I've often said, "Tolkien wrote British books. Jackson takes his books, and translates them into a language that people all around the world- no matter what race, nationality, or creed- can understand."

...
...

Heh heh! Mew2Too, the small-time critic! Who would've thunk it?

 

[Fig]

One thing I don't like with Jackson. He very much butchered the orcs in "mindless minions of evil", where they had much more individuality in the books.

Check out "The Uruk-Hai" in TTT (chapter 3). Throughout the chapter, we learn :

1)The moria orc joining the raiding force did so for a reason of their own : they are not there because of Sauron or ring or whatever, they are there to avenge those of their numbers killed by the fellowship. Is that such a vilainous feeling?

Or is that exactly how any human would act in the same circumstances?

2)Grishnak comes back to the company of orcs led by Ugluk. He does so "Because there are some good lads too good to be left to die" or something approaching that. IE, he could have fled, but come back because he doesn't want to let his troop die under the command of a fool.

Same with Ugluk constantly refering to troops as their "lads" - they care for the troops they command, not just as cannonfodder, but as people they are responsible for.

3)Aragorn (who claims to know something about orcs) claims Orcs wouldn't be trusted with the secret of the Ringbearer, and what he carries by Sauron. Yet, Ghrishnak in this chapter reveals that he knows PERFECTLY well about Gollum and the One Ring. Either Sauron trusts orcs far more than is revealed, or else Ghrishnak has actually managed to figure it out on his own from various sources - which is quite a feat from what people tend to see as "uninteligent orcs".

Similarly, later in the book, two more orcs discuss about what will happen once they have conquered the wolrd, and they talk about the possibility of leaving the armies of Mordor just to set themselves up "like in the old times" as brigands.

All in all, The Two Towers do something very impressive - it makes the orcs feel almost human in some aspect. Cruel, greedy, but are those inhumane traits? Far from it.

It's a shame that in TTT the movie all we got is the "not even cannon" "Can we eat them?" dialogue that DE-humanize the orcs.

 

[Mew2Too]

You've got a point, Silverblade. I never though orcs were very un-human in the books. Yet, Jackson does want to keep them far away from human in the movies. I don't know why that is, exactly.

 

[Adam]

Originally posted by Mew2Too
I read the LoTR trilogy and tried to read "The Hobbit," but I didn't get very far into it before I returned it to the library. ( Though I own LoTR, so I can read those anytime. I intend on doing so every year like teh pros! )

I actually like Peter Jackson's interpretation just a little better. Tolkien wrote a series of books that possessed a large number of human frailties, truths, and triumphs. Sometimes, though, you had to dig really deep for them. Peter Jackson does that for you in the movies. I've often said, "Tolkien wrote British books. Jackson takes his books, and translates them into a language that people all around the world- no matter what race, nationality, or creed- can understand."

...
...

Heh heh! Mew2Too, the small-time critic! Who would've thunk it?

Tolkein did write "British" books - he wanted to create a new mythology for England, and he was very much in love with older English ways (such as old languages like Anglo_Saxon). I don't think Peter Jackson has changed that particularly, he has just taken his own interpretation of the story. IMO, LotR has always been about a more clear cut definition of good and evil, and I don't think that the film suffers from dehumanising the orcs - it always has had an "us against them" mentality. Gollum on the other hand is a far more conflicted character in the movie. Personally, I prefer neither, and am just happy that we have two amazing versions of the same work, each of which use their medium wisely - for all his descriptive ability, middle-earth has never quite come alive to me in the books as it has in the films, the cinematography of which is just amazing, but in the films the plot is necessarily more condensed.

 

[Crystal Articuno]

Originally posted by Damian Silverblade
One thing I don't like with Jackson. He very much butchered the orcs in "mindless minions of evil", where they had much more individuality in the books.

Check out "The Uruk-Hai" in TTT (chapter 3). Throughout the chapter, we learn :

1)The moria orc joining the raiding force did so for a reason of their own : they are not there because of Sauron or ring or whatever, they are there to avenge those of their numbers killed by the fellowship. Is that such a vilainous feeling?

Or is that exactly how any human would act in the same circumstances?

Up to a point i will agree with you Damian, however, remember that what destinguishes orcs and humans is that the former ones are driven by only by their desire to destroy - just see what they did in Fangorn Woods; they cut trees because of their natural malice.

2)Grishnak comes back to the company of orcs led by Ugluk. He does so "Because there are some good lads too good to be left to die" or something approaching that. IE, he could have fled, but come back because he doesn't want to let his troop die under the command of a fool.

Actually, Grinshnak came back as the Nazgul that was supposed to take the prisoners didn't show. As the day was approaching (Mordor Orcs cannot stand the sun) he and the other Mordor Orcs had to find a showdowy place to hide and at the same time they needed the Uruk-hais protection as the latter ones where able to withstand the power of Anor.

Same with Ugluk constantly refering to troops as their "lads" - they care for the troops they command, not just as cannonfodder, but as people they are responsible for.

True there is basic spirit of team building but its only basic and only limited to each orc tribe.

3)Aragorn (who claims to know something about orcs) claims Orcs wouldn't be trusted with the secret of the Ringbearer, and what he carries by Sauron. Yet, Ghrishnak in this chapter reveals that he knows PERFECTLY well about Gollum and the One Ring. Either Sauron trusts orcs far more than is revealed, or else Ghrishnak has actually managed to figure it out on his own from various sources - which is quite a feat from what people tend to see as "uninteligent orcs".

I think that Ghrishnak does not know many things concerning the ring and all its story but if we accept that ors are corrupted elves by the breeding technicks of Gorthaur then they must have retained their immortality - in that case, Ghrishnak might have lived enough to know roughly speaking the legend of the One Ring - it impossible to know exactly what is going on as Sauron only "informs" the Ringwraiths. As for golum - the orcs had the command not to hurt is - and later on the book, we learn that Gollum was well known in mordor as it served her Majesty, Shelob.

Similarly, later in the book, two more orcs discuss about what will happen once they have conquered the wolrd, and they talk about the possibility of leaving the armies of Mordor just to set themselves up "like in the old times" as brigands.

As i said there is a protogonus team working but orcs are mainly driven by their insticts and not by their mind and whatever logic they posses

All in all, The Two Towers do something very impressive - it makes the orcs feel almost human in some aspect. Cruel, greedy, but are those inhumane traits? Far from it.

It's a shame that in TTT the movie all we got is the "not even cannon" "Can we eat them?" dialogue that DE-humanize the orcs.

The "best" book for me from all Tolkien's works is Quenta Silmarillion. I love the descriptions and the history of the Elves, their kingdoms, the majestic Nargorthrod, the hidden Odolinte, the underground capital of Doriath...

In Silmarillion you can see many things that can explain events and situations in the LoRs (such as the hostility between Dwarves and Elves e.t.c.)


Namarie

 

[Ginger Cat]

*hugs Grima*
Mineeeeeeeeeeeeeee...
And no one touch Boro, either. Poor guy...
*blink*
Anyway, I read the books and watched the movies... I liked both. Didn't like 'em for exactly the same reasons, but really... Loved 'em both.
While the movies did stray from the main topic(s) at times, I still... *shrug* I don't know. Too late at night to explain, but I liked 'em. The interpretation wasn't direct, but that's all right with me... For the most part. And there's Grima in both.
Then again, we've made our own version of the movies here...
*cough*
I read the books after seeing the first movie; the first one took me a while, the last one a few days. Not much into the first book, I s'pose... the other two excellent. Also, liked the second movie better... No reason... really...
*shrug*
I'd say more, but it's late and my brain's fuzzyriffic...

 

[Jude]

Originally posted by Adam
(such as old languages like Anglo-Saxon).

*chews on Adam* Ic lufie eald English; hit is wynn... and that 'tis the extent of my Old Engilsh, because I'm out of it today.

I must say, however, that the languages Tolkein made where probably one of the main reasons I've kept my copy of the Lord of the Rings. I found that it wandered aimlessly, and seemed to be little less than a story about good versus evil, with no grey in it. It was extremely laborious, and the language was at some times confusing. Of course, beautiful, but confusing; he used very formal speech, and I found that Hobbits were the sort of creatures to dance around in the grass after it's rained.

It just seemed... very strange; I mean, watching the movie, I kept expecting Sam and Frodo to hold hands and skip off singing 'You Are My Sunshine' into the sunset.

^^;;

Perhaps, though, that is just me, and my perverted mind.

I will, however, say that I totally agree with Tolkein's views on languages, especially about Welsh and French, of which I shan't repeat afore brother-mine decides to crucify me; and Finnish... well, that was really a sort of language that I found more harsh; beautiful, of course, because a desert can be beautiful, but harsh...

Welsh, though.

*moan*

 

[Legend of Didesy]

LoTR is a great book. If you have the time. I can't say much because I don't know much. I did a quick read over the holidays, but yeah.

One thing I don't too like about the movie is that Gimli is portrayed wrongly. He seems to be pathetic and there just as a joker. eh