[Dininziliel]

I am in a quandary of ambivalence. I love and hate the movies.<P>I have by now accepted Jackson's movies as his version based on LotR and not the filming of LotR. Perhaps if he had not succeeded in rendering ME itself so well it would not be such a big deal. I cannot count the number of times I have watched the extended versions of both FotR and TT, and still I alternate regularly between "Wow--that's wonderful" and "expletive deleted." There are things that cheapen the story and ME:<P>--The schlock horror schticks such as a manic-looking Gandalf grabbing Frodo from a dark corner while scary music plays to ask, "Is it secret? Is it safe?" And the yep-they're-gonna-do-it obligatory eye-opening of the dead elf in the Dead Marshes which is right before the oh-no-not-this-too scary ghoul images clawing out for Frodo.<P>--The continuity gaffes, of which enough has been heard except the extremely unfortunate distraction during Boromir's/Bean's amazingly effective death scene where now he has his gloved & gauntleted hand upon Aragorn's/Mortenson's shoulder and now he doesn't. You get pulled and jerked around in two directions at once too many times.<P>--The stunts that everyone seems to feel substitute for substance--those ones mainly with Legolas. I like them, too, but can't help feeling I'm easily impressed to be falling for a cheap trick designed to wow the easily impressed.<P>Then there are the plot deviations and outright destruction of the story. I am a tad more at peace with the Faramir thing since watching the extended TT, but it seems with each movie that more and more license is being taken with the story. I won't enumerate the plot destructions as that's been done better than I could articulate them. <P>I feel we--the fanatics--have been taken for a ride by Jackson. The changes in FotR were understandable and did not destroy the integrity and meaning of the story. In TT the departures from the story seemed to have added more changes for the sake of personal gratification as well as for ticket-selling "tension," as they are fond of saying. While tension is indeed essential, it's lamentable that Jackson did not have a little more faith in either the audience or the story itself.<P>After reading about the even more outrageous changes in RotK, I seriously considered not seeing it. And I am someone who bought a 5 disc DVD player just so I could watch the extended FotR without having to disturb the air. I find myself thinking that Jackson should have been 10 years older before he was allowed to make the movies. There are some truly wonderful moments in the movies; however they just make some of the changes even more of a travesty. <P>It is the difference between a masterpiece that transcends time and the box office, and a bunch of movies that are very good and ground-breaking, but will recede into the pantheon of epics like <I>Ben Hur</I> and <I>Jurassic Park</I>.<P>It is the difference between <I>Lord of the Rings: the Movies Based on the Book</I>, and <I>Lord of the Rings</I>. I could have added much more respect to the awe of Jackson's movies if he had titled them, <I>Peter Jackson' LotR</I>. It is the story that deserves awe, not the movie-making.<P>Those of us who grew up and nourished ourselves on the book have a longing to be in it because, in a very real sense, it is true and profound. How sad to see the purity of that experience irrevocably changed by cheapness of marketing and story rewrites. I would like to be able to further separate the book from the movies, but the disappointment with the movies of coming so close yet falling so far gets in the way.<P>I guess I feel I was given a ticket to go to Hobbiton, and all I got was those plywood doors. But I keep coming back to try to find a way to be happier with the plywood because [sigh] that's all I'm going to get.<p>[ 12:15 AM December 13, 2003: Message edited by: dininziliel ]