Tolkien Adaptations - LOTR, Hobbit, Ring of Power... Discuss

I originally read the book(s) when the FOTR was about to be released in the early 2000's. I loved the book and the movies didn't disappoint. The movies were mind blowing adaptations. The combo of the story, real landscapes, miniatures, and CGI was incredible at the time. I think the movies still hold up very well today.
The Hobbit movies got WAYYYYY too bogged down in Peter Jackson trying to stretch the source material into something it wasn't and became a special effects orgy that stained the sheets.

The Rings of Power:
First off, the scale and production of the episodes is incredible.
The first episode was a bit slow, but it had A LOT to do to try to establish the main characters but fell a bit short on trying to establish the darkness that we all know is coming. It is true that the nearly all of residents of Middle Earth think that darkness was vanquished with the defeat of Morgoth and were generally blind to the new rise of darkness (Sauron). I'm sure a lot of the lack of 'darkness building" is due to the fact that Sauron is likely disguised as a current character and is pretending to be a friend but ultimately it is all to establish his foothold so that he can take over (e.g. Emperor/Sith Lord Palpatine).
Anyway, as the pieces start to come together in the second and third episodes, it is really starting to get good. I'm excited to see how the season plays out. The other thing to think about is how many seasons this show is planning to go. Will the scene with Isildur cutting off Sauron's fingers be in season 3 or 4? Because if that happens this season, this is going to be a pretty short "series".

I will preface this by saying I have read the Hobbit and FOTR (quite a few years ago) but never the Silmarillion so I'm sure I'm a bit rusty of some of the backstory this series covers. That being said I'm kind of underwhelmed so far. The visuals and production are great but it's kind of slow, probably because of the multiple threads it's trying to follow. But what has bothered me the most so far is it feels like it's trying to make every scene some big, ominous, dramatic thing; too much slow motion and big dramatic music and not enough interesting character development. I'm hoping it picks up as it ties more of the storylines together.

But that's all just, like, my opinion man.

But, but, but ...... the jolly harfoots!

Flat characters and no sense of humor. Other than that.... well... actually... I'm having a hard time paying much attention because of the flat characters and lack of sense of humor.

What happened in the last episode? Maybe my kid remembers.

Humor????? Tolkien?!?!?!?


bwahaahaaahaaaaaaa .........

It just doesn't make any sense. The characters' motivstions are weird and contrived the orc "hiding under the middle earth Version of blue tarp " and building a sulphur prison camp makes no sense.

The slo Mo "awesome elf moves" annoys me.
And I skipped all of the jolly proto Hobbit scenes where they interact with an istari ( gandalf?).
It looks superexpensive, but the writing is just bad.


Edit: oh edit and the ominous music is so absurdly ominous all the time, especially near the end in the Mini cliff Hunger " revelations" it borders on the absurd.
They to inject meaning into something where there is none.
They try to transform their writing blunder into a great mystery.
And they try to invoke Tolkien's grand backstory and myth, but somehow it Stays super Hollow.

Not my cup of Tea after episode 3.

Could Istari be Tom Bombadil?? Feel free to laugh at question, given my not having the patience to delve deeply into the back stories.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PB

Could Istari be Tom Bombadil?? Feel free to laugh at question, given my not having the patience to delve deeply into the back stories.

---

The problem is that as Tolkien's critics said.. His books are juvenile.. They were ok to read but certainly not great.. Not so good as source of inspired script writing.... And the early history/backstory?. Honestly who gives a damn.. Either make a good interesting tv series or dont.. The books aren't some sacred text for fucks sake.

Tom is one of the two oldest beings in middle earth and wasn't sent there in the second age. Who or what exactly he is has never been solved.


Edit: and istari is just a term for the five sorcerors/ Maia sent to middle earth in the second age to aid the world against sauron.

The beard guy talking to insects resembles gandalf in the movies, but radagast was also supposed to be an animal friend.

I think is also comes down to "rights" that Amazon has. They don't have film rights to the stories in The Silmarillion. Therefore characters like Tom Bombadil aren't available. Radagast is a possibility. My money is on Gandalf.

The show runners said that their goal was to create a show that would appeal to viewers without any familiarity with Tolkien and one that would be accessible to a preteen audience.

They succeeded by creating a program suitable for easily distracted twelve year olds who are too dumb to read. It barely even qualifies as Tolkien. High fantasy done according to the audience's lowest common denominator yields a rather basic, generic vibe in spite of the huge budgets. As far as I can tell, Amazon bought the rights just to use proper nouns created by Tolkien and has very little interest in using his actual stories.

Anyone interested in a show about real emotions and recognizable adult motives should be watching HotD, a story about two childhood best friends who will become bitter adult enemies when the futures of their own children are threatened. Its a bit slow now but hey, GoT didn't really start cracking until Ned lost his head. I can see promise in this one, unlike Rings.

Rings of Power is just like Jeff Bezos: lots of money and utterly soulless. I can't see this getting any better.

Tolkien adaptions, I have some opinions some expressed here before.

This most recent series leaves me cold and I should be in their target audience if I wasnt part of the smallest birth year in the smallest generation...

I read the Hobbit when I was 11 or 12. I loved it, def some of the first YA fiction in my mind. great beautiful simple fantasy book.
The movie version(s) )didnt make it past one) were a bloated disaster. Made my blood boil

Read the FOTR series in HS, likely took some time off for other fantasy, Shanarra, Dragonlance, etc read parts of The Silmarillion, enjoyed the illustrated edition especially.
Liked the Ralph Bakshi animated adaption ( I was young and it was cool! ) and actually saw it a number of times, most notabley in 1992 during the riots in LA. I was in college and we just hid in my buddies GFs dorm room, doing bong hits and watching the the Lord of the Rings..
When they came out I really dug the films, especially the set up of the first. It was all spot on and really brought the series to life. DIdnt rewatch repeatedly or anything but was impressed by the scope, the cinematography, the acting, all of it.

So given all of the above one would think this new series would be up my alley! It isnt. No gripping story, just world making and in a confusing way. Couldnt get past the first and noone has given me a reason to try again.
GIant waste of money and dont see how it doesnt create a drag on Amazon Studios

To All you mushroom eating hippies: is this bakshi love a 70s thing? Were you all high?I thought it was absolutely terrible when I tried to watch it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by subtle plague

To All you mushroom eating hippies: is this bakshi love a 70s thing? Were you all high?I thought it was absolutely terrible when I tried to watch it.

---

then watch this instead

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQicmcbJYB0

It took guts to make this. It was renamed, buried and then forgotten for 10 years until it got a new life on the back shelves of hip video stores. Ironically, this is now considered Bakshi's best work and its target, Walt Disney's thinly disguised minstrel show, Song of the South, is buried so deep in the Disney vault it hasn't seen the light of day in 50 years

So, it is a 70s thing [emoji3]

An addiction to rotoscoping, maybe?

But seriously, if you haven't seen Coonskin, check it out. It's a true relic of a time before political correctness crippled art. The casting director and show runners of Rings should be tied to a chair and forced to watch this film repeatedly until they understand that.

I read the Hobbit and Trilogy by 6th grade and saw the Bakshi version in a theater in 1978. I begged my parents to take me.
The Cinema Drafthouse in Alexandria VA was the only arthouse playing it in the DC metroplex.
My parents were ready to leave as soon as possible.

The Silmarillion takes some focus but the stories are rich. Prolly too much to properly translate to film.

Love the LoTR movies but can't sit thru the Hobbit flicks. Too much new, not Tolkien, stuff to distract.

Well they lost me with episode 4. I really wanted to find something in rings.but Alas....there is nothing.

I skipped half of it then watched ad astra with Brad pit.
A really slow movie( basically 2h of monologues), but lightyears ahead of anything in rings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by subtle plague

To All you mushroom eating hippies: is this bakshi love a 70s thing? Were you all high?I thought it was absolutely terrible when I tried to watch it.

---

I saw portions of it as a filmstrip (not sure if this was a thing in yurp - sort of a slide show) I think in middle school, and it played much better semi still

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by subtle plague

Well they lost me with episode 4. I really wanted to find something in rings.but Alas....there is nothing.

I skipped half of it then watched ad astra with Brad pit.
A really slow movie( basically 2h of monologues), but lightyears ahead of anything in rings.

---

I can well imagine your plight - I've had similar issues with other movies that think they can play with sacred stories.
I'm finding it reasonably entertaining, obviously because I don't have much to compare it to - uninformed bliss, if you will.

I'm watching and will continue watching. But so far it hasn't been a great story, but it's been good enough to keep me tuning in. And as someone else said, it's really lacking any of the humor of the Hobbit or LOTR.

I’m scrolling TGR right now because this shit is bo-ring.
Get it?
Episode 1, and I’m not watching episode 2 unless my daughter tells me it’s worth it, and we’ll have a bonding thing.

Chip the glasses, crack the plates. That’s what bilbo baggins hates.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Ad Astra fucking sucked.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dantheman

Ad Astra fucking sucked.

---

See how Bad ROP is?

I liked it, but I can see where people criticize it. [emoji3]

Just finished the series. Watched the last 3 episodes on my phone on a plane, which is kind of funny given the production value. But it never got all the interesting, never got all that funny, the characters never got much depth. But I'm still hooked.