What are your most hated parts about the L.O.T.R movies?

[Ellewen]

The only scene I didn't like was the history of Gollum, seeing it as the opening scene of RoTK caught me way off gaurd. Also my parents were there with me and they think the movies are too vilent anyway so seeing that as the opening scene didn't plead my case in any way...

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

I don't think we should go on ignoring the low points of the movie and pretend they're not there.

Er - Barrow-Downs members are not, on the whole, noted for being backwards in coming forward about their gripes with the films ...

Originally Posted by Boromir88

There's faults in everything, Tolkien had his fair share of critics, and when you make something for everyone to see you are also expecting it to be criticised and picked apart, not just receive compliments.

It really depends upon whether you approach the films as a viewer seeking enjoyment or as a critical analyst. I have no objection to critical analysis of the films, and indulge in it myself occasionally, but mostly I just watch them to be entertained. Because mostly that's the purpose for which they were made. They are blockbuster "action" films, albeit rather superior ones (imho). So I tend to approach them as such.

I realise that it's because they are based on a book which we all hold dear, but how many other "action" films to we analyse to the same extent?

[alatar]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

It really depends upon whether you approach the films as a viewer seeking enjoyment or as a critical analyst. I have no objection to critical analysis of the films, and indulge in it myself occasionally, but mostly I just watch them to be entertained. Because mostly that's the purpose for which they were made. They are blockbuster "action" films, albeit rather superior ones (imho). So I tend to approach them as such.

It may be that, unlike most other films in my 'extensive' DVD library (think that I own about ten movies), I've watched the LOTR DVDs many many times, especially FOTR:EE. Sometimes I have them on as background as I do other tasks, such as ironing (don't ask!) and other times I'm actually watching them to...well..watch them. By repeatedly viewing PJ's work (which I have to say that I'm thankful for), I cannot help but notice certain issues. Sometimes I just jump to the next scene - most of TTT:EE is like that, as I'd rather not see the Ents (yawn) - but there are times when I decide to watch a scene more closely as someone might have had a strong opinion about it, and so I want to 'see it for myself.'

Another poster may have liked a scene that I did not, and so, armed with their point of view, I'll rewatch it and may see something that I hadn't seen before. Or not.

Anyway, think that it comes down to caring about the material. If I didn't care or like the movies so much, I wouldn't have watched them as much and also would not have been so vocal with my criticisms.

[Boromir88]

I realise that it's because they are based on a book which we all hold dear, but how many other "action" films to we analyse to the same extent?~Saucepan

For me, it's actually pretty much every movie. I've had classes on film studies and during my college days, I'd usually get in with a group of buds from the class and 1-2 times a week watch a movie and critique it.

But, I'd say for the person who just goes to see a movie, to watch a movie, I say rarely. I see what you're saying, I think it was the same in the Harry Potter movies. Those who had read the books were angry and disappointed in the 3rd movie, Prisoner of Azkaban. Where I've only read the first book and I was quite happy with the 3rd movie.

I think I just look at films so critically because that's what I've done for so long. It doesn't make the LOTR movies bad, or horrible (I can pick out many that are horrible), but there are NON-BOOK related problems in the movies. The main one being from I believe a post I said earlier on unity. Does this make sense? Does it make sense for Aragorn to spare Grima a messenger who arguably did more damage than the Mouth of Sauron, then slice off the Mouth's head? Things like that, not in comparison with the books. I think most changes Jackson did because he wanted to attract a wide variety of audiences, purists and movie-goers. To do that he had to balance things out, and compromise, which is only his job and I do not blame him for.

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Does this make sense? Does it make sense for Aragorn to spare Grima a messenger who arguably did more damage than the Mouth of Sauron, then slice off the Mouth's head?

It's perfectly explicable, given that the circumstances of each are far from identical. It seems to me that most plot/character "inconsistencies" can be explained one way or another with some thought, provided that one recognises that the characters and events are not the same as those depicted in the book. Of course, most film-goers won't notice such "inconsistencies" and therefore won't have any need for an explanation.

I suppose that if I had to identify one aspect of the films that irritates me the most, it is the technical mistakes. Such as continuity errors, dead orcs moving, anachronisms in the background and Legolas getting his directions mixed up. With the amount of money lavished on the films, and the incredible level of care and detail that went in to them for the most part, I feel that such matters should have been addressed (on the EEs at least, if not the cinema-released versions).

Then again, I wouldn't have noticed any of these either (even the Legolas/direction of Isengard one) had I not seen them pointed out here in the Downs.

[Reg Pither]

I finally got round to watching the RotK EE DVD yesterday! (Yes, I know, I'll hand in my elf ears and hobbit feet for being so lax...)

So here a few things for this dislike thread ('hate' is far too strong a word) :

- Aragorn's murder of the Mouth of Sauron just seemed wholly inappropriate, gratuitous and out of character. I was really shocked when I saw it happen! Having read a few explanations here about MoS not being officially 'parleying', I feel a little better about it, but it still jars. They could at least have tried to justify it by letting us see Aragorn become angry and vengeful after learning of Frodo's 'death'.

- I was bored for the first 30-40 minutes of the film. Opening with Smeagol and Deagol was a real turn-off, and things didn't improve until we finally got to the muster of Rohan. After that, it was a pretty good rollercoaster ride.

- The beating of Denethor was just plain wrong, matched only by his further abuse at the pyre. Even Shadowfax joined in! And despite the quote from the book cited earlier in this thread, I'm sure Gandalf used 'magic' to disarm Denethor, not physical violence.

- Until I read about him on various fora, I had not the slightest inkling that the crippled, potato-faced Orc leader was supposed to be the great Gothmog! Very poorly portrayed.

- Why on earth would you charge Mumakil instead of just avoiding them?

- Frodo sending Sam home. I'm speechless, really.

- All the Arwen being tied to the Ring and strange dream sequences guff. Waste of time and effort.

- The Gondor soldiers were pretty useless for all their fancy armour.

- How come the Army of the Dead had to be 'convinced' by Aragorn that he was the King who could free them from their oath? Surely they would have 'sensed' that he was the one?

Anyway, that's enough for the moment, as I actually found a lot that I liked, including several genuinely tear-jerking moments, but they'll have to be in the 'loved' thread.

Oh, and one last thing for the 'dislike' thread : TTT. All of it.

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

Originally Posted by Reg Pither

Until I read about him on various fora, I had not the slightest inkling that the crippled, potato-faced Orc leader was supposed to be the great Gothmog! Very poorly portrayed.

What thats Gothmog ! ! !


Pippin : He just seems so foolish and he is just plain trouble all the way throug the movies. In the books he som times appears to be smart (atleast thats the impresion i get)

That PJ chooses to change who says what ? Why

The battle at Helms Deep. Why does Theoden not defeat the armies of Sauruman, why does it have to be Eomer and Gandalf.

The fact that the walls of Minas Tirith just crumbels when they are hit by the rocks, that the armies of Mordor launches.

But actually i liked the movies.