[Kard8p3]

I love reading, but CHRIST, those books were too boring for me =/. I loved The Hobbit though, I read through it about 6 or so times, and I really should read it again. Guy sounds bitter though, but oh well, if the movie had been the EXACT same as the books, it would have bombed, no doubt.

[bill0527]

Awwww..sounds like someone has a bad case of the Mondays.

I bet he wasn't too bitter to cash the checks.

[arab]

too cut down? it's not faithful.

too much from source? it's bloated.

fuck you, guy.

[Log4Girlz]

The Potter chick doesn't whine this much.

Doesn't she live in a solid gold castle?

[theCHENRY]

Know why the movies were awesome? Because fuck Tom Bombadil.

[Edmond Dantès]

Basically this. I can't stand when the kids / grandkids of famous people somehow think they're some sort of an authority on the works they had no involvement in. It's especially annoying when they get all whiny about how their parent's/grandparent's legacy is being ruined when they only have themselves to blame for selling the damned legacy in the first place. Puhlease. Close connection? Why? Because half of him came out of the author's juice bag? Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if the kid has never even read the books.

He helped his father in writing the novel by proof reading the the whole thing while Tolkien was writing it. He has reorganised his father's other work with utmost precision and it was he and his fellow siblings who convinced Tolkien to actually write the novel along with C.S Lewis. Tolkien did not intend a sequel to The Hobbit, he was happy with continuing The Silmarillion.

He has a closer connection to his father's work than you'll ever know.

[Kung Fu Jedi]

When the Taran Wanderer movie gets made we'll see who is right!

Deal! For now, we have The Black Cauldron as the only film to ponder.

I've read all five books in the series multiple times as a young adult and even re-read them again a few years back. They are entertaining and enjoyable for what they are and I like how they became more complex and involved as the series ran along, but the Prydain Series can't hold a candle to what Tolkien did with The Lord of the Rings or the expanded Middle Earth mythology.

[Zefah]

I think both the books and the movies are great. The books are obviously more timeless.

I watched the movies on Blu-ray last Christmas and the CG and some of the scenes really haven't aged particularly well (one reason why I hate the use of obvious CG in live action movies).

I can see what he's saying about the Hollywood-style action scenes hurting the films. I agree that they did.

[Zeliard]

haha, i'm just reading 'perdido street station' so i'm curious as to what this is referencing?

Mieville has major issues with Tolkien and what he feels is the damaging influence of his fantasy, and used to regularly rail against the themes and messages in the LOTR books. He's backed off a bit in recent years (partly because every time he'd appear at a convention, people would ask him to lambast Tolkien for kicks), but one of the major reasons his fiction is what it is is that he consciously strived to move it far away from Tolkienesque fantasy.

Here's a quote from him:

"Tolkien is the wen on the arse of fantasy literature. His oeuvre is massive and contagious - you can't ignore it, so don't even try. The best you can do is consciously try to lance the boil. And there's a lot to dislike - his cod-Wagnerian pomposity, his boys-own-adventure glorying in war, his small-minded and reactionary love for hierarchical status-quos, his belief in absolute morality that blurs moral and political complexity. Tolkien's clichés - elves 'n' dwarfs 'n' magic rings - have spread like viruses. He wrote that the function of fantasy was 'consolation', thereby making it an article of policy that a fantasy writer should mollycoddle the reader.

That is a revolting idea, and one, thankfully, that plenty of fantasists have ignored. From the Surrealists through the pulps - via Mervyn Peake and Mikhael Bulgakov and Stefan Grabinski and Bruno Schulz and Michael Moorcock and M. John Harrison and I could go on - the best writers have used the fantastic aesthetic precisely to challenge, to alienate, to subvert and undermine expectations."

- China Mieville

[agrajag]

I can see his point about the second two films, but I thought Fellowship was as close to word-for-word as you can get with a film. They cut out a lot of the fat, but the book had some pacing problems anyway. Don't miss Tom Bombadil at all.

The second two movies had a lot of silliness to them.

But all in all, I think the movies turned out way better than if they were made in a Hollywood environment. Say what you will, but Peter Jackson was somewhat of an outsider to the Hollywood production-line film making.

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

I forgot about that he sued NLC for 80 million POUNDS in unpaid royalties, so I'm sure that explains part of it too and that was part of the Hobbit hold up.

I made an error though, I kept thinking he was a barrister, and just independently well off but it was a child of his.

[Haly]

The fantasy genre is small time compared to the reach the movies have had.

I don't think this is giving the books enough credit.

LOTR -> D&D -> All fantasy literature -> Fantasy RPGs

Maybe if you look at the grand scheme of things but in the world of literature and physical/digital game history, LOTR is unrivaled in influence.

[Malvolio]

While I was let down at some of the changes Jackson and crew made, I really do enjoy his completed version. To be able to assemble such an amazing experience from books that for the longest time were thought to be unfilmable is quite the feat.

However, the omission of The Scouring of the Shire is something that will forever bother me. To me, that was sort of the point of the entire journey to begin with. So while I can see how a purist would be letdown, as a movie fan it was a great ride and one that I enjoy taking again and again.

[Featheredkitten]

Wow @ some of the criticisms of Tolkien's work. I can respect a well-thought out criticism (see China Mieville) but man..."he describes things in depth...no one else does that!".

I'm assuming this is directed at my criticism. What i'm saying is (and keep in mind i've probably read nearly a thousand books since i read them), in the books there's more description for the surroundings than there needs to be. I couldn't get close to the characters or the story, because it felt like every 3-4 pages there were 4-5 pages of description. With characters marveling at trees and rocks as if they'd never seen such madness before. The movies cut all that out by showing you their surrounding, it made it easier to concentrate on the story.

[captainnapalm]

Jackson's LOTR trilogy is one of the greatest cinematic achievements of all time, hands down.

[Error]

philosophical...?

[Anbokr]

As a fantasy fan, I just couldn't get through LOTR. I tried at 10, 13, 16, and gave up at 19. It was just way too droll for me to get through. I loved the movies though ;).

[les papillons sexuels]

philosophy of the book?

it's lotr, not camus, kafka or dostoevsky.

[ConfusingJazz]

Speaking of which: Peter Jackson considering 'Hobbit 2' film split

Happy now, Chris? If this turns out like King Kong, I am going to be cheering for Smaug.

[Fenderputty]

I love reading, but CHRIST, those books were too boring for me =/. I loved The Hobbit though, I read through it about 6 or so times, and I really should read it again. Guy sounds bitter though, but oh well, if the movie had been the EXACT same as the books, it would have bombed, no doubt.

They would have had to make a mini series out of it. Not a trilogy.

I liked the books. I loved the movie. If it wasn't for the movie, I probably would have never read the books actually. I saw the frist movie and decided I couldn't wait for the other two to find out what happened.

They're just dry. Almost like reading an almana / encyclopedia or somthing. I appreciate all the work and though that went into the books, but they're still dry regardless of their accomplishments.

[cyberheater]

Last night I dreamed I was the author of Lord of the Rings – I was Tolkien in my sleep.

Boom. Tish...

[ToddGoku]

Tolkien wasn't a good writer and he tried to cover that up by describing things in excruciating detail.

[Inflammable Slinky]

Haha, Tolkien Jr trying to pass off his Dad's stuff as better than it is

Lord of the Rings was the shitty action movie of early 20th century literature

Real Talk:
In Search of Lost Time >> Lord of the Rings

The Sound and the Fury >> Lord of the Rings

Hell, Don Quixote >> Lord of the Rings

/controversialliteraryopinions

[Sho_Nuff82]

Fuck Tom Bombadil, seriously.

[krypt0nian]

This is Alan Moore levels of idiocy and self (well his father's) importance.

Not surprising when his live has been lived on his father's achievements.

[Neuromancer]

There weren't as many dwarf jokes in the books. Dwarf jokes are never not funny.

[Inflammable Slinky]

This is Alan Moore levels of idiocy and self (well his father's) importance. Not surprising when his live has been lived on his father's achievements.

At least Alan Moore actually wrote the stuff (also Watchman sucked (movie))

[Ó Buachalla]

One thing i agree with him in is the Hobbit just looking like more of the same. Which is a shame imo.

[mattp]

One thing i agree with him in is the Hobbit just looking like more of the same. Which is a shame imo.

good and bad for me
i realllly wanted to see del toro's take on it. but since he backed out, the next best thing is to just have peter jackson make it and have it feel just like the lotr

[The Technomancer]

The movie adaptions were literally about as good as film adaptions were ever going to get. Acknowledging the constraints placed on any film its really hard for me to see how those movies could have been significantly improved.

[maquiladora]

Tolkien wasn't a good writer and he tried to cover that up by describing things in excruciating detail.

I guess that explains why its one of the most popular, beloved and influential works of fiction in the world. It all makes sense now.

[Dresden]

The movies are better than the books, can't be helped. Looking forward to the Hobbit.

I'm still fond of LOTR but I've come to regard stuff like the Silmarillion as unnecessary pap.

Mieville has major issues with Tolkien and what he feels is the damaging influence of his fantasy, and used to regularly rail against the themes and messages in the LOTR books. He's backed off a bit in recent years (partly because every time he'd appear at a convention, people would ask him to lambast Tolkien for kicks), but one of the major reasons his fiction is what it is is that he consciously strived to move it far away from Tolkienesque fantasy. Here's a quote from him: "Tolkien is the wen on the arse of fantasy literature. His oeuvre is massive and contagious - you can't ignore it, so don't even try. The best you can do is consciously try to lance the boil. And there's a lot to dislike - his cod-Wagnerian pomposity, his boys-own-adventure glorying in war, his small-minded and reactionary love for hierarchical status-quos, his belief in absolute morality that blurs moral and political complexity. Tolkien's clichés - elves 'n' dwarfs 'n' magic rings - have spread like viruses. He wrote that the function of fantasy was 'consolation', thereby making it an article of policy that a fantasy writer should mollycoddle the reader. That is a revolting idea, and one, thankfully, that plenty of fantasists have ignored. From the Surrealists through the pulps - via Mervyn Peake and Mikhael Bulgakov and Stefan Grabinski and Bruno Schulz and Michael Moorcock and M. John Harrison and I could go on - the best writers have used the fantastic aesthetic precisely to challenge, to alienate, to subvert and undermine expectations." - China Mieville

Mieville is always so sexy.

[Error]

he probably wanted 50 minutes of characters looking and basking at the majesty that is Middle-Earth, would've been a proper translation of Tolkien describing Middle-Earth in the books.

[krypt0nian]

At least Alan Moore actually wrote the stuff (also Watchman sucked (movie))

Doesn't negate any further self aggrandizement from Moore.

[NathanMcMahon]

I love reading, but CHRIST, those books were too boring for me =/. I loved The Hobbit though, I read through it about 6 or so times, and I really should read it again. Guy sounds bitter though, but oh well, if the movie had been the EXACT same as the books, it would have bombed, no doubt.

I'm pretty much in the same boat. The trilogy was a fucking bore. It's a good thing Peter Jackson better interpreted his father's own world. Also, I feel like I'm in the GoT show threads. It's all an adaptation. Can't be helped.

[melonrabbit]

I hope somewhere the son of Lloyd Alexander is like "fuck off wheres my movie?" They are the better books afterall

Exactly. Where are my Lloyd Alexander movies or/and HBO series people?

[kswiston]

At least Alan Moore actually wrote the stuff (also Watchman sucked (movie))

Both of them should be happy that the movies brought more interest to their work (or their father's work in Chris Tolkien's case). The LOTR film trilogy sold tens of millions of copies of the novels by acting as a $300M advertisement for the books.

[Stinkles]

Fuck Tom Bombadil, seriously.

He's omnipotent as far as I can tell. I feel sure he's gonna show up and save the party from Sauron right at the end. Almost finished with the last book....

[Dresden]

Only thing I want out of Lloyd Alexander's works is Taran Wanderer as a depressing four-hour movie directed by some unknown Eastern Europe dude.

[Darkmakaimura]

I bet he's not too crazy for that Dave Arneson/Gary Gygax game that ripped off a lot Tolkein's work in the 70's, starting something called "role-playing games".

[Ether_Snake]

Sounds like a NERD

Or more specifically, like a nerd who is angry that the mangas he loved so much have become so popular, making him feel less special than ever.

[Haly]

I guess that explains why its one of the most popular, beloved and influential works of fiction in the world. It all makes sense now.

Its core ideas ("elves 'n' dwarves" as Mieville puts it), are extremely viral, the writing itself isn't.

What people draw from Tolkien is his world, not his style of storytelling (boring) nor his prose (overbearing).

[cyberheater]

The movie adaptions were literally about as good as film adaptions were ever going to get. Acknowledging the constraints placed on any film its really hard for me to see how those movies could have been significantly improved.

Yep. The best movie trilogy of all time. Bar none.

[Kung Fu Jedi]

One thing i agree with him in is the Hobbit just looking like more of the same. Which is a shame imo.

I'll wait until I see the new trailer in front of TDKR before I say too much. The Hobbit has lots of potential and is radically different from LOTR, but I just don't think the first trailer has had a chance to show it yet. We're not going to see Smaug for instance and the scenes with the Goblin King, spiders, the Battle of Five Armies and the Trolls are better served in the context of the films in my opinion.

[Kinyou]

Has he even watched the movies? Or just the trailers?

[IceCold]

Would they be able to make LOTR into a show like Game of Thrones? Or would it be to expensive to pull off?

[ghostmind]

He's 87 isn't he?

Cranky old man syndrome.

[agrajag]

I really hate some of you people.

[MattKeil]

LOTR was a a triumph/landmark in worldbuilding, not storytelling, Jackson's movies are much more entertaining than the books.

This is exactly it. Tolkien was a terrible storyteller and his characters are wooden and two-dimensional at best. Jackson did a ton of legwork making characters that were essentially non-entities in the book into real people, and that includes Legolas and Gimli.

Tolkien originally wrote the books as a vehicle to explain his made-up elf language. He was a linguist who loved the intricacy of languages, and that definitely shows in the books. It just doesn't make for very good narrative. Jackson's films have their missteps, but the books have far more. Tom Bombadil alone...

[NathanMcMahon]

Would they be able to make LOTR into a show like Game of Thrones? Or would it be to expensive to pull off?

Probably along the same lines, which is why the nerd rage in both instances is hysterical. As far as a TV show, the definitive version has already been made so there is no need to plumb those depths again.