Lord of the Rings - The Fellowship of the Ring

(330 votes, average 4.48 out of 5)
Facebook Share

Bumper art by Phillip Murphy

Nostalgia Chick on Twitter and Facebook

Comments (277)
  • Zhorker  - I should say something meaningful...
  • joethulhu
    That's a lot of fish.
  • TragicGuineaPig
    Alive without breath,
    as cold as death,
    Never thirsting, ever drinking,
    clad in mail never clinking.
  • OldAndNew
    i was incredibly disappointed that Gollum didn't get to do the fish riddle in The Hobbit.
  • BB Shockwave
    Y'know how that goes... It will be in the director's cut which will have 30 minutes of cut scenes (including the Gwaihir Windlord, hopefully).
  • chadwulf
    Cause the movie wasn't long enough? Lol.

    "........Why not."
    This actually made me laugh out loud.

    I just keep loving the Nostalgia Chick more and more! She's like the Anti-Nostalgia Critic. (I love Doug when he's being himself, but I do not love that character)

    Anyway awesome video. Thanks!
  • 0hai  - RAGE
    I'm really loving the way the ad in the middle freezes, and wont let me watch the rest of the video.
  • ladydiskette
    Let me guess, is it that mountain winter skiing ad. Because it does it for me too in midroll.

    I have great feelings of dread everytime that one comes up.
  • PaladinWind
    With that ad I've found that if you click on it it will unfreeze (as well as open it up in another tab, but oh well). There have been a few times that didn't work, but that was generally just my computer being a pain in the ass and hating all ads, not just that one.
  • Babcake14
    Well well well, a Lord of The Rings review.

    No small undertaking, especially given that, unlike a lot of your material, there's pretty much not a single person that can work a computer that hasn't seen these movie.

    It came out remarkably well though.

    Now about the material itself; I was only like, 10 when the first movie came out, so of course they were pretty much the greatest things ever to my little mind, and even if they have cooled somewhat in my mind, especially after have read the books that I absolutely adore (Yes, even the long talky bits where nothing other than walking occurs) I still dig out my Extended edition boxset every once in a while and dig in.

    Of course I (In retrospect now having read the books) feel that there are things that should have been left in or taken out from the product we ultimately got, and I don't quite agree that every change was for the better. But LoTR still stand high in my mind, especially seeing how they are one of the most formative works of fiction in my life.

    Good review Lindsay, keep it up.
  • PaladinDemo
    Hugo Weaving would be the grizzled veteran in Elf terms.

    Now den, Iz speek Orc for da ress of da reviews.

  • acklaygohome
    In addition to that, choosing Hugo Weaving makes a little more sense when the context of the fact that ELROND ISN'T COMPLETELY AN ELF is taken into account. And think about it; David Bowie was too old when the movie came out. He wasn't as soft as he was in Labyrinth.
  • Divide By Zero
    I'm glad yourself and a couple of others pointed that out. Elrond is half elven. He had a twin brother, Elros, who when presented by the Valar with the choice of immortal elvishness or human mortality, chose to go be king of the Numenoreans. It's implied that this is why Elrond has such a stick up his butt about humans, specifically the one who plans to rob him of yet another family member for all eternity.

    None of which you'd know from the movies of course, but there it is.
  • BB Shockwave
    They call him Elrond the Half-Elven, even in the movies...
  • optimisticaudience
    I wouldn't say that Fantasy and Sci fi are that different, nor would I say one is past focused while the other is future focused. They are together because they are "speculative fiction." Both genres can be summed up as "What if..." One tries to focus itself on a technological or scientific principle to found its universe while another takes a cultural concept for its universe. Not all fantasy is sword and sorcery, and not all sci fi is space battles. Things like Wonderfalls, The Dresden Files, Pushing Daisies, Supernatural, and The Munsters all are fantasies in some form or fashion because they use cultural concepts of animism, wizards, resurrection, ghosts, and monsters, not because they're trying to use a historical precedent.

    That said, /in this work/ Tolkien used a historical precedent in his work, as he was trying to tell a modern (for the time) myth. He tried to make it as much in line with classics as he could.

    As a side note, that is the reason Bombadil is in the books. Yes he kills tension, but this isn't a thriller, it's a myth, and throughout all of classic literature we have writers throwing other characters or stories they wrote into a larger work because they wanted to. Bombadil follows the tradition of Queen Mab in Romeo and Juliet, the Porter in Macbeth, Dido and Anchises in the Aeneid, Hercules in the Argonaut myth, and the sea monsters in Beowulf.
  • ladydiskette
    19:39 - LOL! Someone had to have been trolling in real life, that was funny. XD

    It's like when I set up the DVDs for the display at the local bookstore in the mall, I put up the Family Feature "Dove-approved" movies next to the horror gore-filled movies just for the lawlz.

    Come on Lindsay, admit it, that sounds like something you would do XD LMAO!
  • zenfrodo
    NChick, you're betraying your Euro-centric worldview (and apparent lack of knowledge of the depth and breadth of both genres) by saying fantasy is "euro-based" or "history based". There's plenty of fantasy that does NOT base itself in western Euro traditions; fantasy is set all up and down the time stream, in space, under water, on land, whatever.

    (Star Wars is very much space FANTASY; there isn't an ounce of solid science in it.)

    Just because something is set in outer space does not make it SF. Just because something has castles doesn't make it fantasy. Writers have long muddled those artificial genre lines. There is no clear definition between the two, at all (speculative fiction is a much better phrase defining the SF/Fantasy genre). THAT'S why they're put together in bookstores.
  • Fontinau  - @zenfrodo
    _"NChick, you'd betraying your Euro-centric worldview"_

  • ErynCerise
    I'm pretty sure she acknowledged every single point you brought up. Way to listen.
  • Masque
    She's basically pulling another "Dune" review to pull in people to either agree, disagree, or just plain bitch at her. Either way, she still gets a viewing bump, and therefore more money. Everything else is for the sake of... nothing, really.

    There isn't a whole lot of original opinion here. At least not in the context of stuff that someone else hasn't already said. Her opinions, as long as they are hers and not just for the sake of fan baiting, are fine. Just don't get your panties in a twist if they don't gel with yours. Also, don't abandon your own opinions just to get pulled in line with a critic on the internet, and then bash anybody who dares to speak out against your new found god, or whatever.

    ... Not like this matters either. If everybody was secure in their own thoughts the comments page would likely never exceed more than 1 page.
  • grkpektis  - Are you high
    Yeah lazer guns, space ships and aliens are not science related at all those things are exactly what comes to mind when I think ancient history. I think it's the opposite the fantasy is just a small part of the world. Most people don't have the force but everyone is an alien at the very least.
    Fantasy is not "speculative fiction" because magic isn't going to happen. Science Fiction has basis in science. And movie like Star Wars are not science fiction. A lot of SF has come true. The best SF is not space battles and those stories have foretold technological advances centuries in advance.
  • trlkly
    Nope. Science fiction has nothing to do with how plausible something is in the real world, just in how the (currently) impossible elements are explained to the audience. Magic is presented as being mystical, not completely understood even by the characters in the work. Science is understood and studied, without any mystical elements, even if we don't exactly know how everything works.

    And speculative doesn't (just) mean what you think it means. In this context, it merely means speculating what would happen if X were possible. It makes no judgment on whether it is actually possible.

    And Star Wars is a work that straddles the line. It's mostly science fiction, albeit rather soft (borrowing tropes rather than explaining its own tech) but it does present the Force as mystical, even with the addition of the midichlorians to try and make it more scientific.

    By your definitions, the Time Machine, a seminal work in soft science fiction, would be fantasy.
  • TragicGuineaPig
    What the turkey guy said. Watch a typical episode of Star Trek, and try to explain anything technical in it using REAL science. Almost all the technobabble is nothing but pure speculation.

    Heck, if you take some of the advanced races of Star Trek into consideration - like Trelaine or the Q Continuum - then you might as well say magic is real; granted, it may not be the same thing as in Harry Potter, LOTR, or the Hyborian Age, but what's the difference?

    I believe it was Arthur C. Clark who said that sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic; you can include psionics in there as well. Well, I say sufficiently bullcrap technobabble is also indistinguishable from magic.

    EDIT: Oh, yeah. I forgot. Star Trek had gods. No, I'm not talking about that creature from the fifth movie, I'm talking about Greek gods. The Greek gods actually exist in the Star Trek universe. What next, Cthulhu and Dumbledore?
    Tragic Guineas Pig:

    Are you talking about the St:TOS episode "Who Mourns For Adonais"? They weren't gods, they were aliens. They didn't create humans or the earth. They were just aliens. There was even (vague) explanation for Apollo's power in that episode.
  • TragicGuineaPig
    My point, Thoom, is how do you explain their powers by scientific reasoning? For all intents and purposes, advanced races like these - along with the Q, the Organians, and other super-powered races within the series - might as well be called witches and wizards - or gods - for all the scientific reasoning behind those powers.

    My point is, claiming that magic is a thing that never could happen completely ignores the possibility of the advancement of psionic abilities, like those demonstrated by these alien races. In the end, it matters little to nothing whether you call it magic; it's still just inexplicable power that allows those who possess it to do whatever they want.
  • ghazzterThaOG
    I agree with THOOM, its a space fantasy-- there is no actual science in Star Wars
  • jenlouise
    To be fair they did film scenes with Liv Tyler in Helm's Deep but then they realised that it was a really silly idea. As much as I like the often sidelined female characters getting some airtime, that just would not have worked.
    Great review, can't wait for the next two!!
    PS. awesome to see you're an Extras watcher.
  • TragicGuineaPig
    I hated what they ultimately did with her, though. They basically made it so that Aragorn had to defeat the Dark Lord and reclaim his kingdom, or she would die of... what, I don't know, broken-heartedness? Seriously, what was the deal with her getting sick in the last movie? Whatever the explanation, it was nothing but a plot point to get Elrond to do what he should have done in the first movie: remake Aragorn's sword so he could become king.
  • Fiang
    I didn't know Peter Jackson directed Heavenly Creatures. Huh. Learn something new every day.
  • Neverpleased
    Personally I would have brought up the midicholrids, the force is just psychic power granted by bacteria in the blood.

    100% science based. Made up science, but still science.
  • trlkly
    Nope. That explains how people use the Force, but not how the Force itself works.
  • Tal
    Picture Hugo Weaving saying "Mister Underhill..."

    I suspect he was cast as Elrond Half-Elven to make the character stand out as other when compared to the elves. Though that could just as easily be a fluke.
  • TragicGuineaPig
    Elrond is also not full-blooded elf. He's half human. Sort of like Mr. Spock.

    Speaking of Mr. Spock, why isn't he singing the theme song for the new movie?
  • Slick_richie  - god damn it!!
    would say nice review but blip is being pissy and wont let me watch :(
  • AvidNightmareFan
    they could have cast David Bowie?! WTF?!
  • theSnark
    I KNOW, RIGHT??!!
  • TragicGuineaPig
    No, David Bowie would have had to be cast as a leader of the Orcs of Moria. After all, he is the Goblin King.
  • izy2weird
    Elrond was half human. He would look not as elegant.
  • PaladinDemo
    Ders nothin sayn hez half hummie.
  • RJ Dalton
    He wasn't "half" human. The title "half-elven" doesn't refer to a percentage, it refers to the fact that his bloodline has a race that is not elf in it. He's way more elf than he is anything else.
  • TerminalSanity  - -Actually he was half human
    Read the appendix in return on the or the Similarion both of his parents were half Elven and half human. The Half Elven title is literal. As a Half-Elf he and his brother were given the choice to either embrace immortality and live as an elf or accept the "Gift of Man" and live and die as a human. Elrond chose to be an Elf and live forever his brother Elros chose to be human and is actually a direct patriarchal ancestor of Aragorn making Elrond his Great 24 times over or so Grand uncle.
  • PaladinDemo
    Everybody is saying that he's part human. So Elrond would be like Spock ifhis human side gives him an advantage.
  • Lightice
    Yes and no. Elrond's father is Eärendil, who was the son of a human and an elf. His mother is Elwing who was the daughter of a human and an elf. Hence, he is full 50% human, in terms of heritage. But in Tolkien's world half-elves get to choose which group they belong, spiritually speaking, and Elrond chose to be an elf, while his brother Elros chose to be a human.
  • Keiji
    He's also a super war hardened veteran, he was THERE at the battle of mount doom. He'd be a bit different looking, facially, with that much time, even for an elf, and those memories working on his face.
  • Keiji
    Oh, so you're one of those people who expected the adaptation of a much more light hearted adventure book to have the same tone as the trilogy that made it possible? Cute.

    Yea, four people out of hundreds of thousands who were alive when it happened. Cool line that makes sense.
  • trlkly
    What's cute is that you think it didn't. That's honestly what kills it. It tries to be the LoTR when it isn't.
  • Keiji
    What meakes it even cuter is that you also think the LOTR series had jokey goblin kings with beards made of fat, and orcs that talked at all besides "AAAAAH WHAT'RE WE GANNA EAT NEXT" or "SARUMAAAAAN" or jokes about taking shrooms. It "tried" to be lord of the rings because it's set in the same mythos.

    When the orcs talked, it was always super menacing. When the orcs talked in the hobbit? Sure, menacing, but also sillier than the LOTR series.

    Lindsay and you made the mistake of comparing this movie to a movie in the same mythos with a similar, but distinctly different tone when watching it, instead of seeing it as its own thing.

    The hobbit is far more steeped in the lore of the books, and with two extra movies for just the one book, it'll be an even better adaptation than LOTR was, one movie to one book.
  • Psxpert2011
    I don't the big dead to post first and say "first" but posting first and saying "fish" takes the cake

    (GG- Zhorker - I should say something meaningful... GG) =P

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    Fantasy should never, I mean NEVER EVER be made from Book-to-Movie... this is environmentally cruel. It kill the human imagination. I loved playing "War in Middle Earth" for a old computer I had.

    Pros for Fantasy movies: Appreciation for the book goes up along with hate for movie directors.
  • Gibralter
    I like when anyone talks about fantasy they never mention Fritz Lieber.
  • painocus
    Because he was not really that important? Wasn’t most of his fantasy just rehashing of Robert E. Howard's shtick? Good rehashing I'm sure, but still, not a historical landmark in terms of genre evolution.

    Speaking of Howard I'm more surprised he didn't get a mention. Sure, most pre-Tolkien fantasy authors like Lord Dunsany, William Morris or E. R. Eddison have now fallen into more-or-less obscurity, but when NChick asked for a mainstream and commercially successful fantasy movie; Conan the Barbarian was just sitting there like an elephant in the room. (Not that that film was particularly faithful to Howard's writing, but that's a whole other can-o'-worms.)
  • alexanderthegreat
    "Wasn’t most of his fantasy just rehashing of Robert E. Howard's shtick?"

    No more than Howard was just "rehashing" Burrough's shtick, or Burroughs rehashing Haggard, or Haggard rehashing Stevenson, etc. Leiber was influenced by Howard, no doubt, but his style was quite different, and quite influential on his own - most crucially Dungeons & Dragons, which drew substantially from Leiber.
  • Ravensong
    Much that once was is lost for none now live who remember it...

    You know I think that maybe, just maybe, that line is meant to imply that much of the knowledge from the ancient times are now lost. Not that the story Galadriel goes on to tell is part of this lost knowledge.

    You can tell that this is the case because numerous people in the movie knows and talks about these historical events...

    I mean who would be stupid enough to make a Lord Of The Rings movie and start it out by implying that no one knows anything about Sauron, The War or the friggen Ring of Power.

    Man that was a terrible joke.

    Otherwise great review. To think that David Bowie could have been Elrond. That would have been so awesome...Just imagine his magic dance in that role
  • Keiji
    Well, as I said, four people out of hundreds of thousands is a ridiculously small number. It may as well be none.
  • sunnyl
    Galadriel's line about no one alive remembering the past is very problematic.

    On the face of it, it is completely untrue, but it could mean all sorts of things.

    The first thing that comes to mind is Valinor under the light of the trees; but there are quite a few Noldor in Rivendell who remember that, not to mention Galadriel herself, and all the Quendi who actually live in Valinor, but I don't think she counts them.

    She could be referring to the great kingdoms of Beleriand, but those are remembered by both the remnant Noldor and the Sindar of Rivendell, and King Thranduil over in Mirkwood.

    She could mean Numenor, in which case the only being left who remembers it at its zenith is Sauron. So in that sense its truth.

    If she means the great kingdoms of Gondor and Arnor, then the Noldor, the Silvaren, and the Wizards all remember.

    If she means the dwarf kingdoms at their height, then maybe its true.

    At any rate, its still a good line, but you can't analyse it because it isn't true.

    On an unrelated note, still boggles my mind that the 10/20/50? thousand year old Elvish civilizations never developed modern technology. The Noldor had some pretty nifty magical lights and such, but no electricity.
  • Amesang
    Am I the only one who believes that Galadriel's initial line is in reference to people in the modern age? As I recall, "The Lord of the Rings" and "The Silmarillion" were written as a mythology for Europe (or, at least, England), with the War of the Ring occurring roughly six thousand years ago.

    Since then the Elves would have left Middle-earth or have faded, the Orcs would have been driven to extinction, the Dwarves delved deeper and deeper into the earth or simply gone extinct, the Hobbits shrink further and disappear into the woodland, and the realms of Gondor, Rohan, and Dale fallen and their histories forgotten, with only the "Red Book of Westmarch" left to tell the tale.

    Millennia later all of the knowledge of Middle-earth's past would have been superseded by the Fertile Crescent, Egypt, Greece, Rome, the Far East, etc., etc.

    (Or for a more literal view of it — "none now live who remember it" — there is no one in the modern age of "Middle-earth" who was alive six thousand years ago who experienced all of it; any who had been alive — like the Elves — had all since sailed into the True West and was living outside the circles of the world in Aman with or near the Valar, never to return.)
  • sunnyl
    A nice thought; but its actually a distortion of one of Treebeard's lines from the book, its not a reference to today.
    Even taking it from the movie alone, the context is pretty clear.

    From the context of the intro I am pretty sure she actually refers to Numenor, Linden and Hollin, mostly the latter two.
  • rippedcinema  - first you say
    First mega hit fantasy critically acclaimed movie, other than Star wars, Conan the Barbarian, shrek, Highlander, crouching tiger hidden dragon, the princess bride, various Hercules films, and 90% of Disney's films, but other then those.
  • trlkly
    Star Wars isn't fantasy, and the rest are comedies or converted to comedies.

    You also apparently do not know that there is more than one definition of fantasy. For distinguishing sake, there's also what's called "high fantasy."
  • alexanderthegreat
    Conan the Barbarian, Highlander and Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon are comedies now? There are certainly many subgenres of fantasy, but Lindsay explicitly talked about fantasy as a whole.
  • sunnyl  - Great review.
    - Agree with you about The Hobbit being very disappointing.

    - I also think its stupid that they dump fantasy in with FCi-Fi in bookstores.

    - Tom Bombadil Rocks.
    Yes the story does stall in his house, but TLOTR is about a lot more than just the ring.
    I don't think you quite 'get' Tolkien.
    But it doesn't matter.

    - Aragorn isn't bland, he doesn't have to be a self doubting man afraid of his destiny to be interesting. I prefer the Aragorn of the books.
    But there is no denying that Vigo Mortenso brought the character to life; he WAS Aragorn, just as Christopher Reeve WAS Superman.

    - Frodo falling down, you're right.
    Jackson turned the hero into a wimp.

    - Its Elrond Half-Elven, both his parents were half elf, half human; and he was raised in a world at war. The age lines are perfectly acceptable when you take into account his human blood.

    - One of the things that makes The Lord of the Rings books so wonderful is Tolkien's marvelous use of language; delivered true to the books by highly talented actors it does come to life in the films.
  • PaladinDemo
    Breaking character for this question.

    How can a HALF ELF live for 6000 years?
  • Lyaso  - It's called the Silmarillion--read it.
    Do I really have to post Elrond's lineage here?

    *sighs* Alright. Elrond and his twin brother Elros were the sons of Earendil and Elwing. Elwing was the daughter of Dior; Dior was the son of the first union between elves and men: Luthien and Beren (Beren was the human). Earendil was the son of the second union between elves and men: Idril and Tuor (Tuor was the human). Elrond and Elros were called half elven because of the amount of human blood in their lineage, and they were given a choice as to which part of their lineage they would adhere. Elros chose to be a man and Aragorn is descended from his line. Elrond, on the other hand, chose to remain an elf, which means he is immortal.

    It also means that Arwen is a second cousin about a hundred or so times removed from Aragorn.
  • PaladinDemo
    He should have died of old age in the First Age.
  • Carteeg_Struve
    In Tolkien's world, a half-elf can embrace one heritage or the other. Elrond embraced elvanity (Fuck it. It's a word now.) over humanity. So he gets the immortal life.

    This is like how Arwen ends up embracing a human life, a mortal life. And thus some time later bites it of old age.
  • Ravensong  - Correcting Sunnyl
    As a Scandinavien I just have to say: Viggo Mortensen...He is not of Italien descent you know. Those fuckers already get credit for pasta, Pavarotti and the mafia...

    We the peoples of the scandinavian countries have also contributed something like Scarlet Johanson, sleds, vikings, Eliza Hansen and professional polar bear wrestling
  • TragicGuineaPig
    And Thor. Don't forget Thor. Yeah, sure, he may not be quite as strong as the Hulk, but that magic hammer more than makes up for that.
  • sunnyl
    Typos mate, didn't mean to offend.
    And you really shouldn't be too proud of the Vikings.
    They were great mariners its true; but they were also murderers, rapists, thieves, kidnappers and arsonists.
    Or to put it another way, pirates.

    I do love Scandinavian Mythology though.
    Its kinda appropriate that Viggo got chosen actually, because the idea for LOTR came from The Ring of the Nibelung.
  • Ravensong  - Sunnyl-Thanks for sharing
    Oh my God. Are you telling me that the vikings did bad things to the population of the countries that they invaded!!!!...That just blows my mind.

    I always thought that they were being perfectly nice and civil invaders and plunderers.

    Only taking what the common man could spare and confining themselves to only slapping the asses of the especially alluring babes. Whilst going no further than that...unless she wanted to of course.

    Also I was led to belive that the vikings only burned ugly houses or the houses of ugly people. So that it was Ok like that.
    ...Well you live and you learn

    Given this upsetting new information on the topic though. All I can do is comfort myself by the fact that atleast the Mafia bake sales were done for the good of the people

    I wish you all the best and I say Ærede Hr. du ønskes alt det bedste i dette nye år
  • TragicGuineaPig
    I totally get Tom Bombadil. Basically, if the Elvish religion as expounded in The Silmarilion is orthodoxy, Tom Bombadil is one of the last remaining pagan deities lingering around. He's sort of like one of the pagan spirits that sometimes turn up in Arthurian legends.

    But I have to agree with Lindsey's point: Bombadil may contribute to the flavor of the books, but he contributes little to the story. It's sort of like Conan the Barbarian meeting Santa Claus.

    But Frodo already was a wimp. Most Hobbits are, except some of the Tooks and Brandybucks, both of whom tend to be slightly more adventurous. But there is this: Hobbits have very high Dexterity. Frodo's must be around 5 or 6, though, on a 3d6 scale. Either that, or he keeps rolling a Natural 1 when making his checks.
  • sunnyl
    "Bombadil may contribute to the flavor of the books, but he contributes little to the story"

    Even Tolkien himself admitted that.
    Bombadil's real purpose in the story is as an analogue for all the mythological elements that got left out.

    But, given that the Barrow-Blade of Meriadoc is absolutely essential to the slaying of the Nazgul Lord, Bombadil does serve a real purpose as well.

    But the story does indeed grind to a noticeable halt with him, and Jackson was right to leave him out of the movie.
  • TheGreatEscapist
    Eeeeew! That footage from Peter Jackson's previous work... Needless to say I don't like gorey splatter-fests...

    But I digress.

    I tried watching "Fellowship of the Ring" a couple times or so, and I just couldn't get into it. In both cases they were being broadcasted on TV and I just lost interest by the time I was two-thirds into the movie.

    Even from all that all I could really retain in my memory was:
    1) Merry and Pippin are comic relief,
    2) Christopher Lee has a terrifying voice,
    3) And Gandalf is played by Magneto.

    I guess that's more than I can say for the Ralph Bakshi version; the only thing I genuinely liked about it was John Hurt as the voice of Aragorn. (Like Christopher Lee and Sir Ian, John Hurt is just one of those actors who is impeccably brilliant just by being present.)

    Regardless, I was still glad to listen to what you had to say about it. I especially like the reasoning why Frodo the Everyman is the hero in the story.

    Hee hee hee... Regarding how many times Frodo falls down, all I can really say is Frodo is the Gerald Ford of fantasy heroes.
  • TragicGuineaPig
    Yeah, but why did Bakshi make Aragorn a Native American with no pants, and Boromir a Viking with a beat-up rusty old sword? You would think that the son of the Steward of Gondor could afford some better clothes and equipment.
  • TheGreatEscapist
    I don't know why Bakshi made those changes, but sad to say that's not the worst thing he had done in his film career. From what I could tell his rendition of "Lord of the Rings" was probably his least-awful film, if only because he was adapting someone else's successful story and not an original work.
  • sunnyl
    The irony is that in the books Frodo isn't the everyman.
    Sam is though. He's the real hero.
  • jaltesorensen  - Agree on Tom Bombadil
    Thanks for saying that about Tom Bombadil.

    Ive meet so many who thinks this character is so awesome. I never got him at all. He never fit into me idea of the tolkien universe. I hated Tom Bombadil and all his songs. I never believed that such a childish character (as in the book) could ever be so clever and wise, and still naive and stupid. Tom Bombadil could have been better, if Tolkien gave a better explanation of him, or made him more of a real wizard.
  • trlkly
    He's Valar. The wizards are Maiar.
  • TragicGuineaPig
    That has never been stated. Bombadil is something other than Valar; he's something that transcends pretty much anything in Middle Earth. Even the Istari are uncertain what to make of the guy.
  • sunnyl
    Tolkien deliberately left Bombadil ambiguous, he believed the mystery more important than the character.

    But its easy enough to work out that he is a Maiar, NOT a Valar.
    The Valar are all accounted for and are way, way too powerful to be Tom.
    The Maiar are extremely numerous and vary greatly in power and some are "well nigh as strong as the Valar".
    Tom is one of the stronger ones, and crucially, he still maintains his full power.

    The Istari are Maiar who have been been given real human bodies; their knowledge and power are greatly limited as a result and are therefore more susceptible to the evil of the ring. Although plenty of the Maiar went over to Melkor anyway, that's what the Balrogs are after all.

    Also, Gandalf knows who Tom truly is.
  • TragicGuineaPig
    I don't really buy the Maiar explanation, either, though. And it has to do with the nature of the Old Forest. The Old Forest itself is an anomaly within Middle Earth. In a way, to enter the Old Forest was to the Hobbits what entering Narnia was for the Pevensie children, the only difference is they already lived in a fantasy world to start with.
  • FunkyM
    So yeah, not so controversial after all.

    My opinion? I'm saving it for when I Review these movies myself. :)
  • einoo
    Yeah, I think Fellowship is actually probably the best adapted. Not that the other two movies are bad, far from it, but there are some missteps.

    But I still really love the movies, and honestly, given the difficult-to-adapt source material and the number of hands in the pie when it comes to moviemaking, it's kind of a fucking miracle that they were any good at all.
  • ladydiskette
    There should be a drinking game devouted to Lord of the Rings trilogy.

    Take a drink when Frollo trips
    Take a drink when there is a big long monologue about hope, past, and good v evil.
    double-shots if it's a elf

    Take a shot when the camera makes a panned swipe of a huge open area.

    Take a shot when you see the main characters walking.
    Take a shot when you see someone go insane
    Take a shot when you hear family drama pop up

    Just be sure to have a healthy working liver before you undertake this feat.
  • Flaregun  - ladydiskette
    "Take a shot when you see the main characters walking."

    -Wouldn't that leave you passed out on the floor by about a half hour into *any* movie?
  • Carteeg_Struve
    > Take a drink when Frollo trips

    I just pictured the priest from Hunchback falling forward and face-planting with a stone floor. Thank you. :-)
  • ladydiskette
    lol, thanks, I am glad that put a smile on your face. To be honest, I didn't even catch that I inadvertently said "Frollo" instead of "Frodo" until hours after I posted that.

    And by then it was too late to edit it. XD

    But yeah that is pretty funny to imagine now that you mention it. LMAO
  • fangirl21
    Well NChick, good overview and look at the first of the LOTR trilogy films. Fellowship is and remains one of my absolute fave movies EVER. Much of the things though that you covered were also detailed greatly in the Extended Edition of the movie (which has been watched here till the discs broke >.
  • optimisticaudience
    Did the Tolkein films change franchises that much? I mean, they came out the same time as Harry Potter (the highest grossing film franchise of all time), which had just stretched a two film series (Steven Spielberg's pitch) to seven. I think changing two to seven would be a lot more influential than one to three.
  • arcticwhaleblue
    Brilliant review, Lindsay! Look forward to hearing the others.

    One reason fantasy and SF are lumped together now is that authors tend to write both. Frankly, its annoying to have to look in a separate section for the authors other books. (The Bible as speculative fiction, tee hee.) "How to Write Science Fiction and Fantasy" by Orson Scott Card is a good look at this. (Orson Scott Card the SF writing teacher, not the ultra-conservative.)
    Thank you for bringing up Dragonriders of Pern. The SF elements do come up in later books to a greater degree, and in Anne McCaffrey's other series. But for the most part, they're a combination of both. That in-between genre seems to be growing, and that's all to the good.
    I think one big difference is that SF feels the need to reconcile everything with science, while with fantasy the rules are looser. You may still have to explain how the magic works, but they don't have to be rationalized beyond that. (It's magic, just accept that.)
    "Frodo, of the nine fingers, and the Ring of Doom!" Oh my God, I nearly pissed my pants with laughter at that. That movie (and the Hobbit cartoon) are so silly, but they're so good! I love them.
  • thorondragon
    i think angry joe explained the primary flaw of the hobbit, and why it is somewhat of a disapointment to so many people. by its design, the hobbit is meant to set up for the next movies. personally, i loved it, and wanted more. however by that logic, if we set it up on its own, and the world changes and the next movies are not up and coming, then my love of it would pretty much fall to a lower level.
    one cannot say it is a horrible movie. what it lacks in some of its pacing it makes up with icnredible visuals, action scenes, and the actors. even the dwarves, who are not always too, too itneresting, have great lines and it is a hoot to see them in action once in a while.
    by its design, it will go into the next movies quite easily. however on its own, it is much weaker, evne i must admit that much.
    but i say to most of the negative critics, fuck them. did you know a hell of a lot of those reviwers gave horrible scores becuase of the 48 frames? seriously? something that only appears in a few theaters. it would be like someone giving fing wall-e a horrendous score becuase his seat broke at the theater.

    even jsut internet reviews, unproffessional reviewers, know better than to take the likes of the 48 frames into such a large amount of account of the score. if they discluded msot of that in the reviews, they would probably have to be far higher, which is probably why so many reviewers focused on it.

    another thing they complained about was the cgi. admitably, some moments are not as crisp as others, but the goblin town..... oh, the goblin town! to think every goblin there was supposed to be cg animated. more than once i forgot that they were not ijn costume. admitably the goblin king was far more stand outish, albeit it could be also for his troll like size, but he was amusing.
  • ladydiskette
    I think the whole thing with Eowyn doing it in "The Return of the King" kinda made sense. I mean, Sauran DID say that no "man" could kill him. He didn't say anything about women, children, and animals.

    That probably explains why he was undefeated for that amount of time. I mean, if you think about it, women were not allowed as soldiers on the battlefield. And it was only until Eowyn's bravery and love for her father and her kingdom that she choose to dress up as a knight and go into battle.

    To me, I always had a feeling it was going to be some character of the female persuasion to kill Sauron, it was just trying to figure out who it was going to be. So yeah the ending was pretty predictable to me but I gave it props to still keep me guessing in some other way.
  • Pure_Eternal
    But "man" here means human. This is the old meaning of the word, it's not sexist or exclusionary because a man was originally called a "wereman". Woman was originally "wyfman". Human for example, man is only a part of the word, and it is used to mean all human beings.

    So it was only an exaggeration. It comes up all the time in myths, "no man was able to answer the Sphinx's riddle"....until this guy came along. No one has been able to do such and such, until our hero has done such and such so well that the other guys were probably wimps to begin with.

    The woman thing seems completely unlikely and a bit insulting, as a female myself. "Oh here, you are important just this once and only because you happen to have lady parts." Sexism is over you guys, didn't you see the Lord of the Rings movie? She got the final boss!
  • ladydiskette  - Re: Pure_Eternal
    You're right, and I apoligize if it came off as such. It's just that the ending where she kills Sauron felt like that was what it was leading up to, in a way. Maybe as a foreshadow perhaps.

    I don't know, did it ever feel like that to anyone else besides me?
  • AngelFeathers  - That wasn't Sauron...
    When Eowyn drove her sword into his head that wasn't Sauron. That was the witch king, the leader of the ring wraiths. Sauron is killed when the ring lands in the lava of Mt. Doom during the fight with Frodo and Gollum. It's destruction was the only way to kill him for good and what the main quest of the three movies is about.
  • ladydiskette
    (correction) *the witch king not Sauron

    Okay, I will admit that was a mistake on my part. T__T
  • Semudara
    Yeah, I thought the double-meaning was pretty obvious. You know, "I am no man" and all that. I can't remember if that emphasis / play on words was in the original book or not, but I thought it was done very well.
  • trlkly
    Sorry, but nope. Tolkien has made it quite clear what he intended with that line: a different resolution of the MacDuff prophesy in MacBeth.

    It's part of the trope that prophesies often hinge on alternative interpretations of words. The Sphinx line is not a prophesy, so it needn't be true. But a prophesy must be 100% true.

    And LoTR is both classist and racist. Why in the world would you expect it not to be sexist? It's definitely a product of its time. If you get insulted by that, then you can't read the majority of literature.

    And, ladydiskette, don't appologize. You did not intend to offend, and neither did Tolkien, so it is Pure_Eternal's fault that she is offended. She chose to let something bother her.
  • TragicGuineaPig
    Got to wholeheartedly agree with this one. I distinctly remember that Eowyn did emphasize the fact that she was a woman in the book. But again, she didn't do it alone; the Witch-King's demise was teamwork between her and Merry, a Hobbit, who stabbed the Witch-King from behind with a Numenorean dagger; neither of them was a man, and both of them together were needed to take the monster down.

    It was more than just about the prophecy - it was that both of them were outcast because of who they were. But because they supported each other and grew to trust each other - believed in each other when no one else would - their friendship enabled them to overcome the Witch-King.

    But Eowyn did take down the Fell Beast the Nazgul was riding by herself.
  • Ryuutakeshi
    1. That was the Witch-King of Angmar, not Sauron.

    2. Eowyn killing him was from the book and whole point WAS that she wasn't a man.

    3. The Witch-King HAD been defeated at the fall of Angmar. Hell, they even mention his tomb in the Hobbit.

    Lindsey, I like the review, but I have to disagree with you on the Hobbit. Having never read the book and seeing it only as a movie (and also knowing it is the story prior to LOTR), I found it to be quite good. The film eases you into things and then maintains a fairly steady fast pace all the way to the finish. The dwarves may not have gotten much screentime individually, but I don't think they were supposed to. This was Bilbo's story and the focus was mostly on him, save those parts where it's Gandalf and Co. setting up for LOTR so that the Hobbit can be better tied in with it. Oh, and so we can get some more cool scenes.

    I never did hear though... why didn't you like the Hobbit?
  • sunnyl
    The problem is that in the movie the focus isn't on Bilbo. Angry Joe got it right, the focus of the film is split between Gandalf, Thorin, Bilbo and Azog.

    And more importantly, the whole hobbit's journey treasure hunt has become a subplot in the main plot of Azog vs Thorin.

    And good though the fight scenes were, they were tacked on, there to provide filler to stretch one short book out to three films. That's why Jackson resurrected Azog, to provide filler.
    Clearly he didn't find the original story interesting enough, and building on the extra material from The Appendices and Unfinished Tales would have required too much effort.
    Better to completely rewrite history.
  • ToonaFish
    You are kinda right, but my personal take is that the problem really isn't in focusing on Azog, or Gandalf, or Thorin... or Elrond... or Galadriel...

    What bothers me is focusing on buggers, burping, spitting... I mean come ON guys, that just ISN'T funny. I feel like *I* could make it a much better better movie myself, just by cutting out 45 minutes of needles material! Why did the dwarves take 20 bleeding, painful, no-sedation-tooth- surgery-ing minutes to just ARRIVE!?!? Yes the strange lot is coming in and Bilbo doesn't like it - I don't need it bore in my head for TWENTY MINUTES! NO, I am NOT going to remember 13 different names anyway! Also the trolls, I loved those guys for a bit but it's SO. NEEDLESLY. LONG, it SO. DRAGS for pete's sake I kept begging for the goddamn sun to come OUT already...

    I mean just look at the first trailer! I LOVED that trailer! It's what the movie SHOULD have been like!
    Gods! I sound like Angry Joe in the Airbender review! But it SO pisses me off!
  • Pure_Eternal
    That "castle" is an Orthodox church! the golden cupolas, the white plaster, the cross is a little strange though. Maybe a weird interpretation of a castle? XD

    Elijah Wood is the master of the "Why-did-you kill-my-dog?!" face. He's so frickin cute! Cute as in a little kid way. I couldn't help but pity him when I watched it as a kid, the weirdest character ever. I thought, why is he more childish than me???
  • MusicMovieTheater08
    I'm only gonna say one thing. Thank you, thank you for showing a clip of Sir Ian on Extras. Easily one of my favorite things I have ever seen him done.
Only registered users can write comments!

Follow us on:

Latest Videos

NC: Is Eyes Wide Shut Artsy

Watch Video

Linkara: Top 15 Night Gallery

Watch Video

Oancitizen: Beauty & the Beast P3

Watch Video

Diamanda: Dr Who Season 23

Watch Video

Shaun K: Xbox 360 Retrospective

Watch Video

AWD: The Manhole

Watch Video

Linkara: Cosmic Slam #1

Watch Video

Doug on Eyes Wide Shut

Watch Video

MikeJ: Info - Doggie Doo

Watch Video

LAG: YKW - Time Heist

Watch Video

iRawss: Simpsons Guy

Watch Video

ChaosD1: MMO - Onigiri

Watch Video

Vangelus: Kamen Rider Wizard

Watch Video

BB: Flash Gordan w Linkara

Watch Video

Sage: Gunsmith Cats

Watch Video

iRawss: Bruce Almighty

Watch Video

Brad: Boyhood

Watch Video

Lesbian Talk: Episode 72

Watch Video

Nash: WTFIWWY Live - iDiot

Watch Video

Leon: Mulholland Drive P1-2

Watch Video

Guru: Watch_Dogs BB

Watch Video

Smarty: DAH - HV & Rap Critic

Watch Video

Shaun K: Disney Infinity 2.0

Watch Video

Brad: Boxtrolls & Equalizer

Watch Video

Diamanda: Shit People Who

Watch Video

Paw: 7 Brides for 7 Brothers

Watch Video

Beth E: SJ - New Fall Shows P1

Watch Video

Brad Tries Lay's Do Us a Flavor

Watch Video

Vangelus: CB - Dino Riders

Watch Video

Word Funk: Dead Holograms

Watch Video

Blog Categories

What's Up? (141)
Sports (264)
News (280)
Book Reviews (561)
Funny (583)
Top # Lists (748)
Animation (957)
Wrestling (1004)
Movies (1092)
Anime (1125)
Thoughts (1175)
Comics (1254)
Misc Reviews (1341)
Music (1475)
Video Reviews (1983)
Film Review (2780)
Uncategorized (4063)
Video Games (5317)
Old Blogs (15309)