Christ Centered Gamer

ChickenSoup wrote:what was so horrible? O_o

Everything except the amazing set pieces and imagery. Which were awesome.

lol umadbro

That's too gentle a word.

I canna say the words I have in mind for the 'artistic license' and 'creative vision' of the people working on those movies. This is a fambly site. >_>

I have a "read the whole Silmarillion twice" (however you spell that XD) kind of friend and he literally is nowhere near your level of being offended O_o

Maybe he is just accepting of the "it's not going to be the same as the books" thing? idk lawl

Or, maybe, (I'm one of those Silmarillion types too) he's realized that artistic license isn't a bad thing at all. Look at the Lord of the Rings movies. They aren't exactly like the book, but you tell me how you would fit what would easily be 15+ hours of filmable material into a movie that would actually be view-able by the normal person, and then we can talk.

Wow. Run-on sentence. Anyway, I think it's obvious that the reason Frodo shows up is because the movie is a frame story. You may say "But that's not how the book was!" The core story is still there, wrapped around an external narrative. If you have a problem with frame stories in adaptations, please destroy your copy of The Princess Bride movie at once. In all seriousness, it's just a story-telling device.

So forgive us if it seems silly of you to spew movie hate like this.

Deepfreeze32 wrote:Or, maybe, (I'm one of those Silmarillion types too) he's realized that artistic license isn't a bad thing at all. Look at the Lord of the Rings movies. They aren't exactly like the book, but you tell me how you would fit what would easily be 15+ hours of filmable material into a movie that would actually be view-able by the normal person, and then we can talk.

Wow. Run-on sentence. Anyway, I think it's obvious that the reason Frodo shows up is because the movie is a frame story. You may say "But that's not how the book was!" The core story is still there, wrapped around an external narrative. If you have a problem with frame stories in adaptations, please destroy your copy of The Princess Bride movie at once. In all seriousness, it's just a story-telling device.

So forgive us if it seems silly of you to spew movie hate like this.

To be fair, the original Princess Bride book is like a frame story within a frame story.

But I agree.

TripExistence wrote:To be fair, the original Princess Bride book is like a frame story within a frame story.

Well yes, but...

Your entire point hinges upon me being a normal individual unwilling to sit through a 27+ hour exact adaptation of the books.

Your point...is lacking. XD

well, considering you live in a world in which a major film company took it upon themselves to produce 9 hours (that's not even the director's cut extended edition with extra whatnots and soforths O_o) of awesomeness based in your favorite fantasy world, I don't see a reason to complain...

There's a list of reasons. Mostly, they just didn't do it right. They carried the main story along, but did not maintain it close to the books except in major plot points (and even then, they took artistic license).

What they did right, they did really right. What they did wrong is to me a belt sander giving me road rash on my rumpus. No matter how you sit on it, it still burns and chafes and hydrocortisone is of no help at all. It's just grody pain that's slow to heal.

Not that I won't sit down and watch the entire thing fairly easily. >_>

Edit: You guys should also know that I'm only about 67% serious. Yes, I'm /grumped about how they messed with LOTR, and I'm pretty sure they'll jank with The Hobbit to the point it distracts me and gives me gas. And I'll bludgeon people with giant ear-swabs if they say that the movies are correct to the books. I tend to fart on artisic license when it comes to book-to-movie translation, since it boggles my mind that you'd make a movie about a book and only be 37% in line with said book. Try writing your own story sometime instead of boogering an already written one.

But it's just a movie. I whine about it, but it's just because these books are so special to me. I'm glad they're remaking The Hobbit, if only for the current generation. So...yeah. It's not going to change my life whether The Hobbit has Galadriel leading the expedition and Frodo tagging along as a videographer.

I just hope they do an epic Smaug. O_o

CHOZON

pretty sure the froderp and galadrifail parts are only li'l bitty bites of parts

SRSLY

/notsrseitherheh

Just thought id add that I own the entire original printing box set of the four books

Am I the only one who saw the LOTR trilogy before I read it?

(Yes, I did read it later...)

ArcticFox wrote:Am I the only one who saw the LOTR trilogy before I read it?

(Yes, I did read it later...)

Seriously? And I always thought you were a respectable nerd...

ArcticFox wrote:Am I the only one who saw the LOTR trilogy before I read it?

(Yes, I did read it later...)

oh dude you just lost all your cred