Arwen-Undomiel.com
http://www.arwen-undomiel.com/forum/

Why do so many have trouble with the film and the book?
http://www.arwen-undomiel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11236		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  Dumanyu [ September 23rd, 2006, 9:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Why do so many have trouble with the film and the book?
The book is too long to stick to every part in the film, and some adaptation needed to be brought to the film to keep it exciting. I don't quite get all the purists out there who look for every little defect in the film, and think of it as a heinous sin.
For myself, I'm grateful for the films, because were it not for them, I would never have read the book, AND I'm pretty sure I'm not alone.
Author:  Aredhel Ar-Feiniel [ September 23rd, 2006, 10:14 pm ]
Post subject: 
i read the hobbit LONG before the movies came out ... my mum bought em ages ago and i was slowly reading my shelves away
Author:  elanor260 [ September 24th, 2006, 2:47 pm ]
Post subject: 
I guess I'm sort of one of your "purists". I understand that each decision to omit or change parts of the books were made very carefully, but I did like some of the parts that they didn't show or changed. For example, Faramir never brought Frodo and Sam to Gondor. He understood the importance of their mission and allowed them to go. I feel like that was a better course for the story to take.
Author:  vikingmaiden [ September 24th, 2006, 10:00 pm ]
Post subject: 
I started reading the book before the film came out, but finished it around the time FotR came out.

I understand that the film had to make changes, and I enjoy each in its own right. I just am a bigger fan of the book :)
Author:  Darrell [ September 25th, 2006, 6:34 am ]
Post subject: 
I also understand that they changed some of the tale for cinematic purposes, but it was a great story anyway, without any alterations. And some of the changes they made make me shudder and complain loudly every time I see them :P

Sure, there are people who read the books because of the films, but some of us loved the books before the film was even concieved, so I think that we have a right to be aggrieved at some of the changes :D
Author:  Ring_Bearer [ September 25th, 2006, 5:03 pm ]
Post subject: 
Personally, I love the kinda literature 'The Lord of the Rings' represents, so I think that the films are just a contribution to that passion I have for literature. Anyway, I cannot deny it was a big help for those that didn't even know about Tolkien, you know. But, definitely, I would have read the books with or without films :)
Author:  Starlight [ September 25th, 2006, 5:52 pm ]
Post subject: 
I love both the LOTR books and movies. Yes, there were deviations from the book, but there is with every book turned into a film. LOTR was one of the best transitions I have ever seen.
Admittedly, I love the book more than I love the movies, but that's probably only because there's more of the books for me to love.
Both the movies and the books are wonderful, because you see, they're both LOTR. And there's just something about LOTR, something no other book or film has, that makes it magical.
Author:  Dumanyu [ September 25th, 2006, 9:31 pm ]
Post subject: 
Darrell wrote:
I also understand that they changed some of the tale for cinematic purposes, but it was a great story anyway, without any alterations. And some of the changes they made make me shudder and complain loudly every time I see them :P

Sure, there are people who read the books because of the films, but some of us loved the books before the film was even concieved, so I think that we have a right to be aggrieved at some of the changes :D


I would never ask anyone to give up aggrieved status over the changes. I myself feel Gollum should have just fallen from the cliff upon getting the ring in the end, as opposed to fighting with Frodo.
It's just that so many people get their panties in a bunch over seemingly trivial diffeences.

P.S. No matter what your political affiliation, I saw this bumber sticker today for the first time...

FRODO FAILED...BUSH HAS THE RING.

Makes me wanna blow lunch.
Author:  Larael [ September 29th, 2006, 9:54 pm ]
Post subject: 
What a good subject to bring up! I think if people started the book when they are at an older age, say in their teens, and when they are at a higher reading comprehension level they will enjoy the book a lot better. I found that when I read the books when I was 9 and 10 it was a lot harder than when I reread them this summer.
If you do read them when you are younger I think it would be easier if a parent read them to you. That way you can talk if you don't understand something, and it keeps you going because someone else is reading with you.

As for the question in the poll. I read the books before the movies so it doesn't really apply to me. However I do know some people who would have never read the books if there hadn't been movies first.
Author:  Dumanyu [ September 29th, 2006, 9:57 pm ]
Post subject: 
I myself am a perfect example. I first read the book at around 39 years of age, the hobbit, and the Silmarillion soon after.
Author:  Larael [ September 29th, 2006, 10:14 pm ]
Post subject: 
And I'm positive you understood more of it than an eleven year old. :) You've just proved my point.
Author:  Starlight [ September 29th, 2006, 10:42 pm ]
Post subject: 
Age is definitely a big factor. I know that I couldn't have read LOTR and really fully understood it when I was younger. I wish my parents had read it to me.
The Hobbit is much easier to understand. I first read that at about 10, and I fell in love with it. I didn't read LOTR until later though.
I think that the movies have done a lot of good in encouraging more people to read LOTR. Even though I don't like admitting it, I actually saw the movies first. Then, when my eyes were opened to the wonderfulness that was LOTR, I knew I had to read the books. And now I love the books even more than the movies.
So you see, it all works out. :)
Author:  Aredhel Ar-Feiniel [ September 29th, 2006, 10:48 pm ]
Post subject: 
^LOL yeah I swear I didn't understand any of the books as much as I do now ... I read the Hobbit when I was 8, ha ha!

Dumanyu wrote:
I myself am a perfect example. I first read the book at around 39 years of age, the hobbit, and the Silmarillion soon after.

Hmm I know this isn't relevant but how old are you? :blush:
Author:  Dumanyu [ October 1st, 2006, 10:46 am ]
Post subject: 
Haldir o Lórien wrote:
^LOL yeah I swear I didn't understand any of the books as much as I do now ... I read the Hobbit when I was 8, ha ha!

Dumanyu wrote:
I myself am a perfect example. I first read the book at around 39 years of age, the hobbit, and the Silmarillion soon after.

Hmm I know this isn't relevant but how old are you? :blush:


I'll be 42 in 19 days... :annoyed:
Author:  Starlight [ October 1st, 2006, 12:59 pm ]
Post subject: 
Oh wow! I would have neve guessed that. If it makes you feel any better...........? Happy Birthday in 19 days anyway! :)

I think The Hobbit is good for getting younger children into LOTR. It's easy to read, the story is interesting. Also, whiel there are definite morals, they're more subtle and there aren't as many as in LOTR. Also, there's the sheer length of LOTR compared to the moderate length of LOTR. It makes it much easier to read.

So here's a question for you guys: At what age do you think it's good for kids to start reading LOTR?
Author:  Dumanyu [ October 1st, 2006, 6:58 pm ]
Post subject: 
I've been trying to get my kids to read LOTR for some time, but it seems a daunting task for them at 8,9, and 13(all girls, god help me). I think you bring up a good point, maybe I'll start them on the Hobbit first.

Thanks for the b-day wishes, Tinuviel.
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/